I played it on the medium level and finished it in 14 on my first pass. Very dissapointing. (just as well my flatmate bought it and not me) And before you come up with some half assed "can't have searched around" or something: Yes I did, not much serching about to do compared to other games.
The engine and all that it contains is brilliant. I am more eager to see some of the mods and future games that use this engine, they will be incredible.
Stupid argument. Bills take a lot of punishment before they become useless. (excluding accidents, which don't count) Until that time their worth does not change. Exchanging a Bill costs very little.
Face it, this is a terrible analogy. Saying "swap a battery" will work because dollar bills do is completely falicious.
A bill does not have an "actual" value at all. Although I am not a historian, my understanding is thus:
Currency began life as a precious metal whose weight and value was standardised by the state. (e.g. gold floren) The value was in the precious metal contained in the coin, thus it had an actual value.
When banks came along, they had to now deal with larger amounts of money that made it impractical to carry around that much. Banks would issue checks/bills that gauranteed the holder to a certain arbitrary amount. Previously a letter of guarantee would have been used by nobles/wealthy people etc, but now it was standardised by a money lending institution.
Later the government decided to introduce a bill, which was given a standardised value. Unlike the coin, the component parts of a bill are worthless. At one time the federal reserve had enourmous amounts of gold to back the bills being issued, so in effect by exchanging bills, you were exchanging shares in government gold.
Paper money is an official document that the government guarantees to the holder is worth the amount written on the front. The amount is fixed because, like any other legal document, once "signed" (signiture is printed of course), you cannot alter the document without having it re-signed by the federal reserve bank. (altering a bill would be illegal of cause!)
So a bleached bill would have no value because the conditions of the document are no longer legible, not because the bill had any real value. If you were able to have copies like normal contracts, there would be no problem redeeming its worth.
Of course the confound is that every country has a special set of rules to do with money and it becomes a special case. (e.g. rules about how damaged/what kind of damage a bill can have before it is void/worth half as much etc) But that is the general idea as far as I understand it.
This system is also open to massive abuse. I could very easily buy an old battery and go to my local "swap a battery" to get a better one. Never intending to partake in the swap program...just refill at home.
From then on, as my battery got older, I could just swap them for a better one. Lucky me, I never pay for a new battery!!
Also, Propane tanks last for very long amounts of time. (assuming sensible usage and the occasional paint job) So the analogy is very weak to start with.
What a very bad analogy.
The effectiveness of a dollar bill (excluding "broken ones") is not affected by its condition at all. A grubby $1 still buys the same as a new one.
I thought hydrogen also, I am not up on the latest hummer models...go figure.
At any rate, do you really think the sort of person who is contemplating buying a hummer is going to be worried about the possible side effects of emmissions on other people?? They already ignored the environment. (and therefore other people)
My first comment was in respose to "so whats wrong with that?". I found it ludicrous that someone could "not get it" when it was a colour-based phrase used by white people to refer to indians. Usually in a derogotory way and associated with a period of near genocide for the race in question.
I will assume that your list implies that your friend would not be very happy if someone referred to him as a "redskin" then? This annoys me further, since this term is obviously not acceptable, yet it is ok because a corporate sponsered sports team has been using it since it was ok to use openly racist terms. (like the horrible "gollywog"/"watermellon man" style adverts of the 20's)
The fact that a sports team chose this name during a less culturally aware period of history, does not now make it ok. If you would be insulted to be called a redskin to your face, then how can you possibly be (rationally) accepting of a brand name advertising the fact?
Not being american, the name "redskin" is tragically ironic/outrageous to me. I guess familiarity does not always breed contempt...
As for comedians, many of them use it gratuitously to get a cheap laugh (and it works), but the idea is that comedians will make fun of things that are controversial - especially sterotypes. If racism was not such a hot topic, they would not do it. I think one line of reasoning is that by laughing at how stupid these stereotypes/mentalities are, we can reason about and dismiss them. Part of the problem with racism is that people are now afraid to even discuss race as a topic.
Of course all this does is drive it underground and make people even more resentful, without changing the fundamental problems of misperception.
Of course Marijuana use also greatly increases estrogen levels.
This would lead to an male army of passivist, overweight computer geeks - all who have man titties.
And since the treatment is only midly effective they would be blind also.
Personally, I have my suspicions that (computer use = blindess) may really be:
computer use + internet => porn => ??? =>blindness
You can work out what the ??? is...
But how would you get people to change from the norm in US case (Republican vs Democrat) or in Canada (NDP, Liberal, Conservative).
In New Zeland, we recently switched to the MMP (mixed member proportional) system. This allows minority parties who actually have a significant (>5%) share of the vote to actually get a seat. An individual votes for a party and a candidate and the number of seats obtained in parliment is based on both.
While not perfect, it certainly allows minority parties (who actually have support) to have a say. In our situation, coalitions are formed to get a majority and so party policy becomes not so extreme. The tendancy towards coalition is further exagerated because people tend to actually vote for the party they like, rather than the one they prefer in the hopes that their vote will somehow count more. This was a problem identified in the US elections recently with nader and actually demonstrated in NZ with the removal of a bi-party duoply post MMP.
Coalitions mean a party cannot railroad through legislation through and that debate (remember that democracy=debate anyone??) becomes vital. Even in a bi-party duopoly, the common values of those two parties end up being grossly overrepresented. (e.g. people's complaints about simularities between rep. and dem.)
As I said not perfect but, so far as I have seen, the change has led to a system approximating democracy much closer than others I have seen.
Of course the US/CAN politicians would never buy this, they like their duopoly.:)
pull your head out. Here are some examples that would get you killed in some parts of the world with the wrong crowds:
YellowSkins
BlackSkins
BrownSkins
Just because the US has never had any respect for their native minority, does not mean you get to call them whatever you like and feel good about yourselves as well. This accepted abboration is just indicative of that.
PS: No I am not PC, I hate the word, but I don't like racial slurs. (that goes double for publically acceptable ones) If you don't think it is, then watch any old cowboy movie and tell me they ever use the word "redskin" in a good way???
I agree with the first statement, but I think your "piece of society" discription is a bit weak. A piece of land in a particular country is a "piece of society also", from a certain point of view.
loosely, intellectual property ownership is owning a concept or idea. This concept used to have to have a physical form (prototype) but not anymore.
In short, it is abstract property ownership - owning the intangible. This concept is usually a "product" or process of some sort.
Because the zealots of capatilism used the cold war and subsequent polarisation of US society to try and turn everything into an investment opportunity, individuals (read: corporations) can now own almost anything. They are even pushing to own natural resources, like streams, now.
Intellectual property was just a natural extention of this whole runaway process. Companies wanted to own chemical formulae and pieces of software just like the blueprints to a ford. The laws that enabled this were badly written and had far too many ambiguities. This was coupled with an understaffed patent office who believed that litigation would solve any of the bad patents they issued.
Of course it cannot continue like this and it will have to collapse at some point. However I seriously doubt that the collapse will be as spectacular or as "good for the little man" as people are hoping/predicting.
The government will regulate, but it will be simply to slow things down a bit, rather that to rebuild the system from the ground up. Senators are funded (read:controlled) by the very people who stand to lose from a rewrite of the patent system. You can be sure that the system will not be overhauled anytime soon.
In fact, IMHO, the motivation will be to save coporations some of the litigation costs involved in dealing with rogue patent conartists, rather than anything to do with the public good.
AUS and NZ laws are different to US laws. No surprising given the state of corporate involvement in politics.
In NZ we have 7 day "right of return" law which states that any commericial outlet that sells a defective product MUST accept a return. We even have a Commerce Commission that handles complaints. Judging from past cases, I have no doubt they would step in on this one: The game does NOT work as advertised, therefore you should be able to return it.
It makes sense to me, a seller of goods SHOULD be responsible for the condition of those goods. Consumers should be offered protection from rougue/greedy suppliers.
I replied, much the many others I see, to say you are wrong and have no idea what you are talking about. It was worth responding to point out your fallacious point of view, not because anything you said had anything of value.
There is nothing incredible about what I have said, only if you are a zealot or politically blind.
And as far as the cold war: in some respects yes, it was just pot calling the kettle black. The country that was suppose to stand for freedom ended up incarcerating people for their political views, holding mock witch-hunt trials to boot. (google search "what is mccarthyism")
In a more subtle way, that is exactly what is happening again with Bush. The formulae:
1) Identify threat
2) Create hyperbolic and irrational fear by sensationalising it
3) Strip away personal freedoms to "protect nation"
4) goto step 1)
Now I am not defending anyone here, but I am certainly not going to stand up and say that the US "stands for all that's good in the world" (GW Bush quote). If you cannot understand why that statement is arrgoant, ridiculous and just plain wrong, then we are obviously operating in other planes of existance and will have to beg to differ...
Please explain how the parent got "insightful" for this mindlessly patriotic, and severely incorrect drivel??
I see you are still under the major misconception that communist states are somehow automatically left wing??
Perhaps you should reevaluate?
Right wing parties are defined by their conservatism, not their choice of political system. You can have a conservative, communist government...like russia...or china for example. Just because they aren't in a RELIGIOUS frenzy (rather than a ideological one), does not mean they are not conservative.
Conservatives usually tend to be all for stripping away personal freedoms to support their religious beliefs/ideology also, but this is not part of the definition - just a trend of overly self righteous politicians.
PS:
Congratulations america, you just turned yourself into a christian, conservative state. Way to go backwards in time!
Re:An account of one reporter's time.
on
Press freedom
·
· Score: 1
Choosing to obey a dubious order because you think it serves the greater good is one thing. Stacking people in a naked human pyramid while getting "Kodak Moments"(TM) taken of you with a huge grin on your brain-damaged face is something else. I am sure no one told them "make sure you do the naked human pyramid thing, that one is a real blast."
And that situation has nothing to do with this one.
There is a big difference between throwing your career down the toilet for exposing massive coverup and just doing it for principle.
The press operate until the "disguise" of reporting the truth. When they decide to liberally embelish the truth for the purposes of entertainment or political influence, then they become dangerous. News Corps specialise in "infotainment". They run reports "based on a true story".
That is why they are so popular...
Re:An account of one reporter's time.
on
Press freedom
·
· Score: 1
Are you sleeping?? He would lose his job/career and his story would not be taken up by any major news station. (and therefore make no difference whatsoever) This is even assuming his station would agree to run the story at all, which I doubt.
Hardly worth it. But I am sure YOU would have done the decent thing...
Re:Americans talk about freedom
on
Press freedom
·
· Score: 1
The constitution (a vague legal document to say the least) maybe somewhat unchanged over time, but he US concept of freedom is not timeless. It has most definitely NOT stood the test of time.
The supreme court's interpretation of the constitution has changed radically since it was written to reflect the changing society. (This is how it must be) In that time all sorts of ideas of "freedom" have been put forward. (McCarthyism anyone???)
So in essence, these consitutions are both extremely vague legal documents that get liberally (haha!) interpreted to reflect the current trends in the society in question.
And as far as the canadian government being in sadder shape than the US....have you been in a coma?????
Re:Survey is biased. France better than USA?
on
Press freedom
·
· Score: 1
You have no idea what you are talking about mr AC. The problems with voting were EXTEMELY loose database matching for ex-cons and incorrectly printed voting cards. This is just BS from the side who just happened to benefit from the mistakes.
Much like many of the other republican statements, it is just wild speculation about what the other sides position will be. (i.e. if the democrats even mention wanting a fair election, it is just them spouting nonsense)
Has ANY democrat said they want unverified/unidentified voting??? No.
Has ANY democrat said they want people to vote in the wrong place? No. (perhaps they might want to make it easier to vote - shame on them!!)
I can't believe the absolute rubbish the right wing "press" comes up with at times. (and yes I realise there are some on the left side as well)
I left just as the hologrind was starting.
I learnt about it by seeing an afk wookie standing in a certain low rank, mob-path brawling humanoids over and over again. (he was "there"(afk killing) for hours) I found out he was cube collecting.
It was great for me because I would sell them for mega cash. I never was tempted by jedi, although I would have liked to be one. I just assumed from the rest of the game that they would be buggy and broken and require enourmous amounts of money, so I would wait till my char was a higher level. (I was right!)
It is sad because I really hoped the developers would pull this off. They had some great ideas - the interface design and skill system was original and very cool once you got the hang of it.
I was even slightly tempted to give it another go if this expansion was any good...but that is just not going to happen now.:)
Great read, very long.:)
Nice to see that nothing (fundamentally) has changed since I first played this game on launch.
I also notice gamespot and IGN gave the game great reviews...man I feel so happy that they are giving us the truth about these games, otherwise I might never have bought SWG...
PS: I actually bought it because I was a SW freak...:)
Re:It ends when they get some tech folks in there
on
More Microsoft Patents
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Slashdot Mirror
I played it on the medium level and finished it in 14 on my first pass. Very dissapointing. (just as well my flatmate bought it and not me)
And before you come up with some half assed "can't have searched around" or something: Yes I did, not much serching about to do compared to other games.
The engine and all that it contains is brilliant. I am more eager to see some of the mods and future games that use this engine, they will be incredible.
Stupid argument. Bills take a lot of punishment before they become useless. (excluding accidents, which don't count) Until that time their worth does not change. Exchanging a Bill costs very little.
Face it, this is a terrible analogy. Saying "swap a battery" will work because dollar bills do is completely falicious.
heh, here in NZ a bill can be worth half as much if one set of serial numbers is more than half missing. Not sure about the US.
A bill does not have an "actual" value at all. Although I am not a historian, my understanding is thus:
Currency began life as a precious metal whose weight and value was standardised by the state. (e.g. gold floren) The value was in the precious metal contained in the coin, thus it had an actual value.
When banks came along, they had to now deal with larger amounts of money that made it impractical to carry around that much. Banks would issue checks/bills that gauranteed the holder to a certain arbitrary amount. Previously a letter of guarantee would have been used by nobles/wealthy people etc, but now it was standardised by a money lending institution.
Later the government decided to introduce a bill, which was given a standardised value. Unlike the coin, the component parts of a bill are worthless. At one time the federal reserve had enourmous amounts of gold to back the bills being issued, so in effect by exchanging bills, you were exchanging shares in government gold.
Paper money is an official document that the government guarantees to the holder is worth the amount written on the front. The amount is fixed because, like any other legal document, once "signed" (signiture is printed of course), you cannot alter the document without having it re-signed by the federal reserve bank. (altering a bill would be illegal of cause!)
So a bleached bill would have no value because the conditions of the document are no longer legible, not because the bill had any real value. If you were able to have copies like normal contracts, there would be no problem redeeming its worth.
Of course the confound is that every country has a special set of rules to do with money and it becomes a special case. (e.g. rules about how damaged/what kind of damage a bill can have before it is void/worth half as much etc) But that is the general idea as far as I understand it.
This system is also open to massive abuse.
I could very easily buy an old battery and go to my local "swap a battery" to get a better one. Never intending to partake in the swap program...just refill at home.
From then on, as my battery got older, I could just swap them for a better one. Lucky me, I never pay for a new battery!!
Also, Propane tanks last for very long amounts of time. (assuming sensible usage and the occasional paint job) So the analogy is very weak to start with.
What a very bad analogy.
The effectiveness of a dollar bill (excluding "broken ones") is not affected by its condition at all. A grubby $1 still buys the same as a new one.
How on earth did this get insightful???
I thought hydrogen also, I am not up on the latest hummer models...go figure.
At any rate, do you really think the sort of person who is contemplating buying a hummer is going to be worried about the possible side effects of emmissions on other people?? They already ignored the environment. (and therefore other people)
My first comment was in respose to "so whats wrong with that?". I found it ludicrous that someone could "not get it" when it was a colour-based phrase used by white people to refer to indians. Usually in a derogotory way and associated with a period of near genocide for the race in question.
I will assume that your list implies that your friend would not be very happy if someone referred to him as a "redskin" then? This annoys me further, since this term is obviously not acceptable, yet it is ok because a corporate sponsered sports team has been using it since it was ok to use openly racist terms. (like the horrible "gollywog"/"watermellon man" style adverts of the 20's)
The fact that a sports team chose this name during a less culturally aware period of history, does not now make it ok. If you would be insulted to be called a redskin to your face, then how can you possibly be (rationally) accepting of a brand name advertising the fact?
Not being american, the name "redskin" is tragically ironic/outrageous to me. I guess familiarity does not always breed contempt...
As for comedians, many of them use it gratuitously to get a cheap laugh (and it works), but the idea is that comedians will make fun of things that are controversial - especially sterotypes. If racism was not such a hot topic, they would not do it. I think one line of reasoning is that by laughing at how stupid these stereotypes/mentalities are, we can reason about and dismiss them. Part of the problem with racism is that people are now afraid to even discuss race as a topic.
Of course all this does is drive it underground and make people even more resentful, without changing the fundamental problems of misperception.
Of course Marijuana use also greatly increases estrogen levels.
This would lead to an male army of passivist, overweight computer geeks - all who have man titties.
And since the treatment is only midly effective they would be blind also.
Personally, I have my suspicions that (computer use = blindess) may really be:
computer use + internet => porn => ??? =>blindness
You can work out what the ??? is...
In New Zeland, we recently switched to the MMP (mixed member proportional) system. This allows minority parties who actually have a significant (>5%) share of the vote to actually get a seat. An individual votes for a party and a candidate and the number of seats obtained in parliment is based on both.
While not perfect, it certainly allows minority parties (who actually have support) to have a say. In our situation, coalitions are formed to get a majority and so party policy becomes not so extreme.
The tendancy towards coalition is further exagerated because people tend to actually vote for the party they like, rather than the one they prefer in the hopes that their vote will somehow count more.
This was a problem identified in the US elections recently with nader and actually demonstrated in NZ with the removal of a bi-party duoply post MMP.
Coalitions mean a party cannot railroad through legislation through and that debate (remember that democracy=debate anyone??) becomes vital. Even in a bi-party duopoly, the common values of those two parties end up being grossly overrepresented. (e.g. people's complaints about simularities between rep. and dem.)
As I said not perfect but, so far as I have seen, the change has led to a system approximating democracy much closer than others I have seen.
Of course the US/CAN politicians would never buy this, they like their duopoly.
pull your head out. Here are some examples that would get you killed in some parts of the world with the wrong crowds:
YellowSkins
BlackSkins
BrownSkins
Just because the US has never had any respect for their native minority, does not mean you get to call them whatever you like and feel good about yourselves as well. This accepted abboration is just indicative of that.
PS: No I am not PC, I hate the word, but I don't like racial slurs. (that goes double for publically acceptable ones) If you don't think it is, then watch any old cowboy movie and tell me they ever use the word "redskin" in a good way???
For the love of god, mod this up please!
I agree with the first statement, but I think your "piece of society" discription is a bit weak. A piece of land in a particular country is a "piece of society also", from a certain point of view .
:)
loosely, intellectual property ownership is owning a concept or idea. This concept used to have to have a physical form (prototype) but not anymore.
In short, it is abstract property ownership - owning the intangible. This concept is usually a "product" or process of some sort.
Because the zealots of capatilism used the cold war and subsequent polarisation of US society to try and turn everything into an investment opportunity, individuals (read: corporations) can now own almost anything. They are even pushing to own natural resources, like streams, now.
Intellectual property was just a natural extention of this whole runaway process. Companies wanted to own chemical formulae and pieces of software just like the blueprints to a ford. The laws that enabled this were badly written and had far too many ambiguities. This was coupled with an understaffed patent office who believed that litigation would solve any of the bad patents they issued.
Of course it cannot continue like this and it will have to collapse at some point. However I seriously doubt that the collapse will be as spectacular or as "good for the little man" as people are hoping/predicting.
The government will regulate, but it will be simply to slow things down a bit, rather that to rebuild the system from the ground up. Senators are funded (read:controlled) by the very people who stand to lose from a rewrite of the patent system. You can be sure that the system will not be overhauled anytime soon.
In fact, IMHO, the motivation will be to save coporations some of the litigation costs involved in dealing with rogue patent conartists, rather than anything to do with the public good.
Of course I could just be being cynical....
AUS and NZ laws are different to US laws. No surprising given the state of corporate involvement in politics.
In NZ we have 7 day "right of return" law which states that any commericial outlet that sells a defective product MUST accept a return. We even have a Commerce Commission that handles complaints. Judging from past cases, I have no doubt they would step in on this one: The game does NOT work as advertised, therefore you should be able to return it.
It makes sense to me, a seller of goods SHOULD be responsible for the condition of those goods. Consumers should be offered protection from rougue/greedy suppliers.
I replied, much the many others I see, to say you are wrong and have no idea what you are talking about. It was worth responding to point out your fallacious point of view, not because anything you said had anything of value.
There is nothing incredible about what I have said, only if you are a zealot or politically blind.
And as far as the cold war: in some respects yes, it was just pot calling the kettle black. The country that was suppose to stand for freedom ended up incarcerating people for their political views, holding mock witch-hunt trials to boot. (google search "what is mccarthyism")
In a more subtle way, that is exactly what is happening again with Bush. The formulae:
1) Identify threat
2) Create hyperbolic and irrational fear by sensationalising it
3) Strip away personal freedoms to "protect nation"
4) goto step 1)
Now I am not defending anyone here, but I am certainly not going to stand up and say that the US "stands for all that's good in the world" (GW Bush quote). If you cannot understand why that statement is arrgoant, ridiculous and just plain wrong, then we are obviously operating in other planes of existance and will have to beg to differ...
Please explain how the parent got "insightful" for this mindlessly patriotic, and severely incorrect drivel??
I see you are still under the major misconception that communist states are somehow automatically left wing??
Perhaps you should reevaluate?
Right wing parties are defined by their conservatism, not their choice of political system. You can have a conservative, communist government...like russia...or china for example. Just because they aren't in a RELIGIOUS frenzy (rather than a ideological one), does not mean they are not conservative.
Conservatives usually tend to be all for stripping away personal freedoms to support their religious beliefs/ideology also, but this is not part of the definition - just a trend of overly self righteous politicians.
PS: Congratulations america, you just turned yourself into a christian, conservative state. Way to go backwards in time!
Choosing to obey a dubious order because you think it serves the greater good is one thing. Stacking people in a naked human pyramid while getting "Kodak Moments"(TM) taken of you with a huge grin on your brain-damaged face is something else. I am sure no one told them "make sure you do the naked human pyramid thing, that one is a real blast."
And that situation has nothing to do with this one.
There is a big difference between throwing your career down the toilet for exposing massive coverup and just doing it for principle.
The press operate until the "disguise" of reporting the truth. When they decide to liberally embelish the truth for the purposes of entertainment or political influence, then they become dangerous. News Corps specialise in "infotainment". They run reports "based on a true story".
That is why they are so popular...
Are you sleeping?? He would lose his job/career and his story would not be taken up by any major news station. (and therefore make no difference whatsoever) This is even assuming his station would agree to run the story at all, which I doubt.
Hardly worth it. But I am sure YOU would have done the decent thing...
The constitution (a vague legal document to say the least) maybe somewhat unchanged over time, but he US concept of freedom is not timeless. It has most definitely NOT stood the test of time.
The supreme court's interpretation of the constitution has changed radically since it was written to reflect the changing society. (This is how it must be) In that time all sorts of ideas of "freedom" have been put forward. (McCarthyism anyone???)
So in essence, these consitutions are both extremely vague legal documents that get liberally (haha!) interpreted to reflect the current trends in the society in question.
And as far as the canadian government being in sadder shape than the US....have you been in a coma?????
You have no idea what you are talking about mr AC. The problems with voting were EXTEMELY loose database matching for ex-cons and incorrectly printed voting cards. This is just BS from the side who just happened to benefit from the mistakes.
Much like many of the other republican statements, it is just wild speculation about what the other sides position will be. (i.e. if the democrats even mention wanting a fair election, it is just them spouting nonsense)
Has ANY democrat said they want unverified/unidentified voting??? No.
Has ANY democrat said they want people to vote in the wrong place? No. (perhaps they might want to make it easier to vote - shame on them!!)
I can't believe the absolute rubbish the right wing "press" comes up with at times. (and yes I realise there are some on the left side as well)
I left just as the hologrind was starting. :)
I learnt about it by seeing an afk wookie standing in a certain low rank, mob-path brawling humanoids over and over again. (he was "there"(afk killing) for hours) I found out he was cube collecting.
It was great for me because I would sell them for mega cash. I never was tempted by jedi, although I would have liked to be one. I just assumed from the rest of the game that they would be buggy and broken and require enourmous amounts of money, so I would wait till my char was a higher level. (I was right!)
It is sad because I really hoped the developers would pull this off. They had some great ideas - the interface design and skill system was original and very cool once you got the hang of it.
I was even slightly tempted to give it another go if this expansion was any good...but that is just not going to happen now.
Great read, very long. :)
:)
Nice to see that nothing (fundamentally) has changed since I first played this game on launch.
I also notice gamespot and IGN gave the game great reviews...man I feel so happy that they are giving us the truth about these games, otherwise I might never have bought SWG...
PS: I actually bought it because I was a SW freak...
China is a much more important trade partner at this stage, but they have already started negotiating with the US I believe.7 7363DF6CC256EFC0029C894?OpenDocument
http://computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf/UNID/C9D099B9
Unless of course the US uses their "free" trade agreements to force all other countries to accept their copyright/patent/DMCA laws...
Oh wait! They are already doing that! (i.e. Australia and soon NZ as well)