As I understand it, the term "compact disc" belongs exclusively to Philips. They think this copy protection, in its current iteration at least, is a crock, and they refuse to let anyone making "enhanced" discs used the CD term or logo.
So look for the logo when you make your next purchase. If it ain't there, you'll know the disc is locked down. This gives you the opportunity to vote with your wallet (or with your internet connection, depending on where you stand on piracy).
Maybe I'm just smokin too much crack again, but...
on
Top Ten Dying Game Genres
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Quote: "For example, a couple years ago when Lara Croft and the Tomb Raider games were generating a lot of buzz, every other new game on store shelves seemed to be some sort of third-person action\adventure that primarily involved staring at the shapely backside of a groaning, attractive young female heroine."
...What the hell is he talking about? Sure, it makes for good-sounding copy, but, uh...yer waaay off the mark there, bro. I can think of Space Bunnies Must Die *shudder* but after that, my mind draws a blank.
#2: A couple years ago? Try like 1997, maybe '98.
I don't usually nit-pick, to be honest, but you just can't start off an article with such confusing laziness.
I think much of this piracy stems from bitterness over lost jobs, high gasoline prices, gov't budget cuts, overpriced music and DVDs etc. Those who have managed to keep their jobs find themselves being given twice as much work, which they must accept or be put on the sidewalk.
I'm not saying it's right, I'm just saying a lot of individually petty reasons can add up to a very big grudge. And we have lots of little reasons. Plus the shadow of a controversial war and vague threats of terrorism. So most people like getting their entertainment without leaving the shelter of their home.
So in total, people feel exposed and abused, and may feel the need to "strike back." How easy it becomes, then, to download some silly little file with music in it. Bunch of greedy suits, and the artists hardly see a dime of it anyway, so what's a dozen little music files?
Then there's the opposite end of the spectrum, The Collector. He (or she) downloads for the sake of downloading. "Hey, the entire Jimi Hendrix back catalog. That might come in handy one rainy evening when I have nothing to do." These people get it because they can, don't really listen to the music, and use what they listen to as nothing more than a digital radio--just listening to the latest pop hits, doing so on their terms and deleting the file when they get bored of it.
So it looks like I'm painting a picture that doesn't leave much room for the ordinary, shameful theif. Truth is, there's enough gray area to fill an ocean. Gray area with regards to the theif's ethics, and with regards to the concrete results of their actions.
The bottom line, for me: Is someone reducing your profit when they weren't going to buy it anyway? Yes, when profit is reduced exactly because the item is so easy to steal.
I'm seriously curious, because it just seems a little silly that even considering open source has to be legislated. Are there laws that forbid open source in this particualar situation?
"Considering that more than two thirds of our brain cells are dedicated on vision, these tools make sense."
Erm, no offense, but I don't think A necessarily follows B here. Putting abstract constructs in visual terms doesn't automatically overcome the fact that you're still dealing with abstract constructs.
"But perhaps they're including corporate email, which often sees a much lower spam level."...Except that drumming up a corporate e-mail address is usually as simple as adding the first letter of the first name to the last name, as in bgates@microsoft.com or sjobs@apple.com. I've gotten several spams to a relatively high-profile domain, the specific address of which had not been used externally, had not been in someone else's CC field externally, and had only existed for a few days before the spam started trickling in.
Your problem is that your sending out 160 resumes in the space of five weeks. The resume readers know how to filter out generic submissions and you do yourself a disfavor by not taking a couple minutes to add some details tailored to the position you're applying for, even if that results in sending out "only" 100 resumes within 5 weeks. Do some research on each company and have that knowledge reflected in the resume, even if it's just something you skimmed off the "About Us" page of their website. Even the most well-crafted generic resume is still generic. Convince the reader you want and are qualified for the specific position. And follow up on your submissions.
..And how they don't allow you to filter keywords, only IP addresses. I assume MS is attempting this in order to avoid mass IP block blacklisting. You get nasty complaints when a large percentage of your user base finds its outgoing e-mail getting sucked into a black hole. But then, this reveals how Swiss Cheesy MS knows MSN/Hotmail is, doesn't it?
"Even if you don't agree with all of the views expressed there, you have to agree that Salon, like Slashdot, is one of the few truly independent news sources out there."
I understand what you're saying here, and I agree, but I wouldn't consider Slashdot a news source so much as a newslinking service. The content-to-link ratio is decidedly in favor to links, whereas Salon is a full-fledged journalistic operation. Slashdot is a manually-organized Google News for geeks, with a discussion section, IMHO. However, in these "digital times" we're living in, the lines get blurred. What actual content Slashdot delviers is more like meta-content communicated through choice of articles.
Wouldn't it simply stand to reason, when all restrictions were removed, that the more capable people would rise to the top? Respectfully, I don't need charts to tell me this. IMHO, using a barometer of "equality" with regards to freedom and diversity is a political interpretation, not a scientific one. On the right wing, you have the "survival of the fittest," and on the left wing you have the "level playing field for everyone."
To say diversity and choice lead to inequality implies that someone's inalienable rights are being violated. Others might rejoice that the proof is in the pudding: when the barriers are removed, the most capable people can rise to the top. To say people are experiencing inequality ignores their potential mediocrity, IMO.
From the article: "But few cases have been successfully prosecuted under state laws, partly because spammers hide their identities -- by forging e-mail headers and routing information or by relaying spam through an unsuspecting host. That makes it hard to pinpoint the humans responsible for sending out the illegal missives."
So, get the database, harvest those real, live addys, and spam away using your layers of obfuscation...
I'd rather keep my addy on the down-low, rather than submitting it to a publicly-accessible database, regardless of the db's purpose. I've learned to be very, very wary of publicizing addys.
Could you provide some examples for those of us who've always known/. as you described? Respectfully, I don't get the same flamefest impression you do, but maybe that's because I came from Usenet and IRC.
Also, I can understand why these same topics (MS & the RIAA) would be repeatedly covered. Although you maye be understandably tired of hearing about their latest shenanigans,/. also seems to act as a vocal focal point to educate people. These two topics, IMHO, should be continually returned to, as a way of keeping peoples' eyes open.
For every dozen posters, I'll bet there's fifty important, influential people monitoring these boards or assigning people to monitor them. These people may have good or bad intentions. There's astroturfing, sure. But (maybe I'm being idealistic here) I'd like to think that, every once in a while, an influential person with good intentions finds an illuminating discussion that causes them to act in a way that makes life a little bit better for Some People, Somewhere.
I don't mean to niggle, but I was under the impression that it was William Gibson who popularized this phrase. Do I just need to cut down on my crack habit or something?
Floppy disks get magnetized, hard drives crash, optical disks get scratched...A book can take a beating, man. All the OCR and voice rec in the world won't change this until we can get widespread, cheap cartridged optical media.
I think this take on media longevity also prevents progress WRT Project Gutenberg. Too many people don't see the point, when they can have the Library of Congress backed up on disk one day but be looking at a screen full of garbage characters the next because someone accidentally yanked the power supply on the server or whathaveyou.
A single $5 paperback book can be propagated more reliably than tens of thousands of dollars worth of networks and storage, although the latter system can admittedly hold a whole library's worth of that single book. But think about the infrastructure required to maintain the latter system. Until we have better media, the costs aren't justifiable, IMHO. It's an idea whose time has not yet come.
Australia may make concessions to the US to maintain favorable status, especially after that nasty bit of terrorism, but I suspect Europe will smile, nod, and tell the States they can shave their arse cheeks if they like.
The US isn't making any friends right now in the U.N., that's for sure. This is not corporate agenda, by the way, this is political. "You agree to a localized version of the DCMA, and we won't put you on our Suspected Harborer of Terrorists List," or some offer of that nature.
It's just fucking lovely when the government co-opts a corporate campaign for political gain. Hey, that rhymes. I see T-shirts and mugs in my future....
Slashdot Mirror
As I understand it, the term "compact disc" belongs exclusively to Philips. They think this copy protection, in its current iteration at least, is a crock, and they refuse to let anyone making "enhanced" discs used the CD term or logo. So look for the logo when you make your next purchase. If it ain't there, you'll know the disc is locked down. This gives you the opportunity to vote with your wallet (or with your internet connection, depending on where you stand on piracy).
#2: A couple years ago? Try like 1997, maybe '98.
I don't usually nit-pick, to be honest, but you just can't start off an article with such confusing laziness.
Plot: 8
Characters: 8
Execution: -4
This video is a trailer for the complete set of animated films to be released on DVD in June.
I don't know why anyone uses it anymore. I'm switching back to Morse Code. Who's with me?
I think much of this piracy stems from bitterness over lost jobs, high gasoline prices, gov't budget cuts, overpriced music and DVDs etc. Those who have managed to keep their jobs find themselves being given twice as much work, which they must accept or be put on the sidewalk.
I'm not saying it's right, I'm just saying a lot of individually petty reasons can add up to a very big grudge. And we have lots of little reasons. Plus the shadow of a controversial war and vague threats of terrorism. So most people like getting their entertainment without leaving the shelter of their home.
So in total, people feel exposed and abused, and may feel the need to "strike back." How easy it becomes, then, to download some silly little file with music in it. Bunch of greedy suits, and the artists hardly see a dime of it anyway, so what's a dozen little music files?
Then there's the opposite end of the spectrum, The Collector. He (or she) downloads for the sake of downloading. "Hey, the entire Jimi Hendrix back catalog. That might come in handy one rainy evening when I have nothing to do." These people get it because they can, don't really listen to the music, and use what they listen to as nothing more than a digital radio--just listening to the latest pop hits, doing so on their terms and deleting the file when they get bored of it.
So it looks like I'm painting a picture that doesn't leave much room for the ordinary, shameful theif. Truth is, there's enough gray area to fill an ocean. Gray area with regards to the theif's ethics, and with regards to the concrete results of their actions.
The bottom line, for me: Is someone reducing your profit when they weren't going to buy it anyway? Yes, when profit is reduced exactly because the item is so easy to steal.
And it would be even better if 5-7-5 wasn't just a Western convenience.
Y'know, like WalkMan and DiscMan. Give me a DVD-Man with 7 or so CDs worth of MP3s. Now yer talkin. Cheap and reliable (in theory).
OK, thanks for clearing that up :-)
I'm seriously curious, because it just seems a little silly that even considering open source has to be legislated. Are there laws that forbid open source in this particualar situation?
...Or InFlow will assume you're a white-collar criminal with a small johnson.
Erm, no offense, but I don't think A necessarily follows B here. Putting abstract constructs in visual terms doesn't automatically overcome the fact that you're still dealing with abstract constructs.
I thought it was the Viper Room. Mmm, there goes my Karma. I hardly knew ye.
"But perhaps they're including corporate email, which often sees a much lower spam level." ...Except that drumming up a corporate e-mail address is usually as simple as adding the first letter of the first name to the last name, as in bgates@microsoft.com or sjobs@apple.com. I've gotten several spams to a relatively high-profile domain, the specific address of which had not been used externally, had not been in someone else's CC field externally, and had only existed for a few days before the spam started trickling in.
Your problem is that your sending out 160 resumes in the space of five weeks. The resume readers know how to filter out generic submissions and you do yourself a disfavor by not taking a couple minutes to add some details tailored to the position you're applying for, even if that results in sending out "only" 100 resumes within 5 weeks. Do some research on each company and have that knowledge reflected in the resume, even if it's just something you skimmed off the "About Us" page of their website. Even the most well-crafted generic resume is still generic. Convince the reader you want and are qualified for the specific position. And follow up on your submissions.
More info HERE This links to the ISOnews forum Will prolly be Slashdotted soon.
..And how they don't allow you to filter keywords, only IP addresses. I assume MS is attempting this in order to avoid mass IP block blacklisting. You get nasty complaints when a large percentage of your user base finds its outgoing e-mail getting sucked into a black hole. But then, this reveals how Swiss Cheesy MS knows MSN/Hotmail is, doesn't it?
All others pay cash...
I understand what you're saying here, and I agree, but I wouldn't consider Slashdot a news source so much as a newslinking service. The content-to-link ratio is decidedly in favor to links, whereas Salon is a full-fledged journalistic operation. Slashdot is a manually-organized Google News for geeks, with a discussion section, IMHO. However, in these "digital times" we're living in, the lines get blurred. What actual content Slashdot delviers is more like meta-content communicated through choice of articles.
Wouldn't it simply stand to reason, when all restrictions were removed, that the more capable people would rise to the top? Respectfully, I don't need charts to tell me this. IMHO, using a barometer of "equality" with regards to freedom and diversity is a political interpretation, not a scientific one. On the right wing, you have the "survival of the fittest," and on the left wing you have the "level playing field for everyone."
To say diversity and choice lead to inequality implies that someone's inalienable rights are being violated. Others might rejoice that the proof is in the pudding: when the barriers are removed, the most capable people can rise to the top. To say people are experiencing inequality ignores their potential mediocrity, IMO.
From the article: "But few cases have been successfully prosecuted under state laws, partly because spammers hide their identities -- by forging e-mail headers and routing information or by relaying spam through an unsuspecting host. That makes it hard to pinpoint the humans responsible for sending out the illegal missives."
So, get the database, harvest those real, live addys, and spam away using your layers of obfuscation...
I'd rather keep my addy on the down-low, rather than submitting it to a publicly-accessible database, regardless of the db's purpose. I've learned to be very, very wary of publicizing addys.
Could you provide some examples for those of us who've always known /. as you described? Respectfully, I don't get the same flamefest impression you do, but maybe that's because I came from Usenet and IRC.
/. also seems to act as a vocal focal point to educate people. These two topics, IMHO, should be continually returned to, as a way of keeping peoples' eyes open.
Also, I can understand why these same topics (MS & the RIAA) would be repeatedly covered. Although you maye be understandably tired of hearing about their latest shenanigans,
For every dozen posters, I'll bet there's fifty important, influential people monitoring these boards or assigning people to monitor them. These people may have good or bad intentions. There's astroturfing, sure. But (maybe I'm being idealistic here) I'd like to think that, every once in a while, an influential person with good intentions finds an illuminating discussion that causes them to act in a way that makes life a little bit better for Some People, Somewhere.
Anyway, whatever, nevermind.
I don't mean to niggle, but I was under the impression that it was William Gibson who popularized this phrase. Do I just need to cut down on my crack habit or something?
Now, if it was proven DevIS were *terrorists*, we'd already be under a barrage of PSAs telling us open-source funds drug abuse or something.
Floppy disks get magnetized, hard drives crash, optical disks get scratched...A book can take a beating, man. All the OCR and voice rec in the world won't change this until we can get widespread, cheap cartridged optical media.
I think this take on media longevity also prevents progress WRT Project Gutenberg. Too many people don't see the point, when they can have the Library of Congress backed up on disk one day but be looking at a screen full of garbage characters the next because someone accidentally yanked the power supply on the server or whathaveyou.
A single $5 paperback book can be propagated more reliably than tens of thousands of dollars worth of networks and storage, although the latter system can admittedly hold a whole library's worth of that single book. But think about the infrastructure required to maintain the latter system. Until we have better media, the costs aren't justifiable, IMHO. It's an idea whose time has not yet come.
Australia may make concessions to the US to maintain favorable status, especially after that nasty bit of terrorism, but I suspect Europe will smile, nod, and tell the States they can shave their arse cheeks if they like.
The US isn't making any friends right now in the U.N., that's for sure. This is not corporate agenda, by the way, this is political. "You agree to a localized version of the DCMA, and we won't put you on our Suspected Harborer of Terrorists List," or some offer of that nature.
It's just fucking lovely when the government co-opts a corporate campaign for political gain. Hey, that rhymes. I see T-shirts and mugs in my future....