Except not. If they're any good, they'll get local recognition, and move up. They could hire a marketer if they felt like it, but many bands do quite well without doing so. But the point is that they shouldn't HAVE to do so to gain national attention, and that's what it's come to. If you want to become big, you have to sign with a label and get ass-raped, because they're in collusion with all kinds of other roadblocks to publicity.
And nobody said life was easy, or any work was easy. That's why it's called "work". Just because you're an "artist" doesn't give you the right to get things "easy" at the expense of the public.
Unless they're Luddites, people aren't opponents of a technology for no good reason. TPM depends on someone else, somewhere, attesting to... something. The point is, it's out of your and my control, which means that there's someone else in control, who holds the keys. For my security, I don't trust anyone else holding the keys in these TPM chips. Apparently, you do.
I'm all for more security. I just don't think this is the right way to go about it, and all I can see it realistically being used for is for on the consumer side limiting peoples rights to use media how they want. For businesses, it may provide some additional security, but even then I'm dubious that proper permissions and access control don't fix that already.
100+ FPS may be pointless, but having a minimum of 60FPS is ideal. If your FPS ever drops below 60, then you start getting closer to having stuttering, etc.
But mice and dogs do have many analogous responses to most things as humans, and they reproduce a hell of a lot faster than humans, and you can breed them so that they exhibit special traits. None of which are possible with humans.
But that's ok, keep it up with your atheistic, pointless anti-humanist posturing. It's amusing:)
Probably not. It's more impacting on highly security-sensitive systems like multi-user servers and such. I run a Core 2 Duo in my laptop, and it flies, never had any serious issues with it. It will periodically get in a weird state booting up and get some bugs detecting hardware (which is probably BIOS related), but a quick reboot fixes that.
I'm not saying that I can't work around it. Just like we could still technically net-cast without paying the license fees to the RIAA et al. But it's still illegal, which is the problem.
"Please enter your Postcode
Due to licensing changes, we're only allowed to offer our radio stream to those in the UK. You seem to be outside the UK, so you need to enter a valid UK postcode below:"
It's completely relevant. One license is based in copyright law, which is well vetted in the courts, and the other is an arbitrary restriction on usage that's completely new as of software (no one says you can only use BrandX hammers to use BrandX hammers, because there's actual competition in those markets).
It's even dubious that they've entered into a "contract". A contract has to have both parties agree to it with full knowledge of what it entails. It's completely unreasonable to expect every person who uses software to be able to decipher the legalese of an EULA, or to hire a lawyer to decipher it, and tell them how they can expect to use the software. The thing is, with places like GM and such, they could challenge software licenses, and might even win. But they have legal departments to decipher the EULA's, and make sure they're in compliance, so it's not worth their while to try to fight one. It's only worth it to the people who are actually affected by them, the smaller companies and individuals who get sued for not even violating the EULA. It's a control tactic that enables unfair business practices and stifles competition.
And as a developer, you have every right to distribute your work. But you do NOT have the right to tell people what to do with it, other than tell them that they can't make more copies (copyright, natch). If you don't want your software used for military purposes, don't sell it to the military. But if you DO sell it to the military, what gives YOU the right to tell them "You can only use this on non-combat systems"?
The most valid analogy I can think of: I own ALL the houses that you could buy. The ones that fit your budget, lifestyle and location (it solves a problem you have), and I'm willing to sell one to you. The catch is, if you buy one of my houses, you have to agree to not use it on Thursdays, and always have classical music playing at 50dB or louder, 24 hours a day. Seems fair, right? I get to dictate how you use what you buy from me, it's all there in the license/contract. It's either that, or just don't buy it. Your car has plenty of room for you to live in. Catching on yet?
You can buy my corn, but you can't make cornbread with it. You can buy my CD, but you can't listen to it in anything other than a Sony player. You can buy my movie, but you have to watch it in 5.1 surround sound, otherwise you're in breach of the EULA. Man, we're headed to utopia with this kind of thinking!
Repeat after me: The GPL is not a usage license, it's a redistribution license. Completely different balls of wax. Anyway, why would a company with the legal coffers to invalidate an EULA actually go to invalidate an EULA that it doesn't read or pay attention to? No one tries to enforce it except against small-time users, so there's no reason to invalidate one. EULA's being "solid" benefits all the big players to be able to make a one-sided contract, and the little players don't have enough clout to fight it, so it's in their best interests to not challenge clickwrap usage licenses.
I could modify GPL code substantally (enough that copyright would protect my work) and yet still be under the licnese of the GPL.
You could modify the code as much as you wanted, and you could use it for whatever you wanted, but you just couldn't redistribute it unless you agreed to the GPL. The GPL only covers copies of the software you distribute, not how you modify it or use is personally.
Direct3D focused on games, while OpenGL stayed in the "high-end" world like you said, catering to CAD systems and big-time rendering when gaming was in it's rapid growth stages. Not to mention I'd bet that MS paid a lot of developers to use their API. DirectX also contains a very good interface to, well, interfaces, which may have persuaded some shops to go with DX over OpenGL, which is only a graphics API.
I can switch from Google by typing "www.yahoo.com" in my address bar. I can switch from Microsoft by getting my company to get a system to replace Exchange calendars and mail, reinstall most computers with a new operating system, set up a new network, new system to replace Sharepoint, replace all of our company standard documents, office applications, etc. The barrier to switch from Microsoft is MUCH higher, so their onus as a Monopoly to be interoperable is much higher than it would be with Google. Google only keeps it's "monopoly" by being good at what it does, rather than locking in their customers and making the barriers to switch impossibly high.
Yelling "FIRE!" in a crowded theater sounds like it'd be fine with you, too. I mean, only stupid people would listen if there wasn't a fire, right? Have your free speech, but it stops as soon as you start inciting other people to violence and crimes. They may be guilty, but so are you. It takes a catalyst and a reagent to create a reaction... you should take away both, not just one or the other. The catalyst could always come in contact with more reagent.
Then how are they paying to put it on the Internet if NOT through those fees? You can't have your cake and eat it too. I'd think that the BBC would be in trouble for taking people's money by force of law, doing something with it, and then not allowing them access to said content.
Looks interesting:)
Just as an FYI, I read the front page of your project. Starcraft actually runs perfectly under Wine set to emulate Win2K actions in Ubuntu 7.04. I just double-clicked setup, and it installed and ran, everything as it's supposed to be. So, you can play Starcraft under Linux other than with your mod. But I'll definitely keep an eye on it.
Slashdot Mirror
Except not. If they're any good, they'll get local recognition, and move up. They could hire a marketer if they felt like it, but many bands do quite well without doing so. But the point is that they shouldn't HAVE to do so to gain national attention, and that's what it's come to. If you want to become big, you have to sign with a label and get ass-raped, because they're in collusion with all kinds of other roadblocks to publicity.
And nobody said life was easy, or any work was easy. That's why it's called "work". Just because you're an "artist" doesn't give you the right to get things "easy" at the expense of the public.
Unless they're Luddites, people aren't opponents of a technology for no good reason. TPM depends on someone else, somewhere, attesting to... something. The point is, it's out of your and my control, which means that there's someone else in control, who holds the keys. For my security, I don't trust anyone else holding the keys in these TPM chips. Apparently, you do.
I'm all for more security. I just don't think this is the right way to go about it, and all I can see it realistically being used for is for on the consumer side limiting peoples rights to use media how they want. For businesses, it may provide some additional security, but even then I'm dubious that proper permissions and access control don't fix that already.
I am "save"? Jesus, is that you Lord? Just learning English since Hebrew has gone outta style?
;) Sorry, I just had to... and I don't even believe in jeebus
6 years != adult. You haven't really thought out what you are saying.
There's a reason they don't let you direct the research. It's because you're an idiot.
100+ FPS may be pointless, but having a minimum of 60FPS is ideal. If your FPS ever drops below 60, then you start getting closer to having stuttering, etc.
But mice and dogs do have many analogous responses to most things as humans, and they reproduce a hell of a lot faster than humans, and you can breed them so that they exhibit special traits. None of which are possible with humans.
:)
But that's ok, keep it up with your atheistic, pointless anti-humanist posturing. It's amusing
And he has such a nice, understanding, even-tempered father to help him deal with it...
Probably not. It's more impacting on highly security-sensitive systems like multi-user servers and such. I run a Core 2 Duo in my laptop, and it flies, never had any serious issues with it. It will periodically get in a weird state booting up and get some bugs detecting hardware (which is probably BIOS related), but a quick reboot fixes that.
http://www.pointlesswasteoftime.com/monkeysphere.h tml
Really, I can't say any more. Just read that essay.
"Dude, I'm not a troll! Even though I'm totally trolling, I'm not a troll!"
Guess it's time to figure out the contracts again, rather than try to shoehorn in technology that doesn't work, eh?
I'm not saying that I can't work around it. Just like we could still technically net-cast without paying the license fees to the RIAA et al. But it's still illegal, which is the problem.
It's completely relevant. One license is based in copyright law, which is well vetted in the courts, and the other is an arbitrary restriction on usage that's completely new as of software (no one says you can only use BrandX hammers to use BrandX hammers, because there's actual competition in those markets).
It's even dubious that they've entered into a "contract". A contract has to have both parties agree to it with full knowledge of what it entails. It's completely unreasonable to expect every person who uses software to be able to decipher the legalese of an EULA, or to hire a lawyer to decipher it, and tell them how they can expect to use the software. The thing is, with places like GM and such, they could challenge software licenses, and might even win. But they have legal departments to decipher the EULA's, and make sure they're in compliance, so it's not worth their while to try to fight one. It's only worth it to the people who are actually affected by them, the smaller companies and individuals who get sued for not even violating the EULA. It's a control tactic that enables unfair business practices and stifles competition.
And as a developer, you have every right to distribute your work. But you do NOT have the right to tell people what to do with it, other than tell them that they can't make more copies (copyright, natch). If you don't want your software used for military purposes, don't sell it to the military. But if you DO sell it to the military, what gives YOU the right to tell them "You can only use this on non-combat systems"?
The most valid analogy I can think of: I own ALL the houses that you could buy. The ones that fit your budget, lifestyle and location (it solves a problem you have), and I'm willing to sell one to you. The catch is, if you buy one of my houses, you have to agree to not use it on Thursdays, and always have classical music playing at 50dB or louder, 24 hours a day. Seems fair, right? I get to dictate how you use what you buy from me, it's all there in the license/contract. It's either that, or just don't buy it. Your car has plenty of room for you to live in. Catching on yet?
You can buy my corn, but you can't make cornbread with it. You can buy my CD, but you can't listen to it in anything other than a Sony player. You can buy my movie, but you have to watch it in 5.1 surround sound, otherwise you're in breach of the EULA. Man, we're headed to utopia with this kind of thinking!
Direct3D focused on games, while OpenGL stayed in the "high-end" world like you said, catering to CAD systems and big-time rendering when gaming was in it's rapid growth stages. Not to mention I'd bet that MS paid a lot of developers to use their API. DirectX also contains a very good interface to, well, interfaces, which may have persuaded some shops to go with DX over OpenGL, which is only a graphics API.
I can switch from Google by typing "www.yahoo.com" in my address bar. I can switch from Microsoft by getting my company to get a system to replace Exchange calendars and mail, reinstall most computers with a new operating system, set up a new network, new system to replace Sharepoint, replace all of our company standard documents, office applications, etc. The barrier to switch from Microsoft is MUCH higher, so their onus as a Monopoly to be interoperable is much higher than it would be with Google. Google only keeps it's "monopoly" by being good at what it does, rather than locking in their customers and making the barriers to switch impossibly high.
but damn if those Cheez-Its and Jolt aren't tasty...
Yelling "FIRE!" in a crowded theater sounds like it'd be fine with you, too. I mean, only stupid people would listen if there wasn't a fire, right? Have your free speech, but it stops as soon as you start inciting other people to violence and crimes. They may be guilty, but so are you. It takes a catalyst and a reagent to create a reaction... you should take away both, not just one or the other. The catalyst could always come in contact with more reagent.
Then how are they paying to put it on the Internet if NOT through those fees? You can't have your cake and eat it too. I'd think that the BBC would be in trouble for taking people's money by force of law, doing something with it, and then not allowing them access to said content.
Put an endline character on all your printf strings and it'll flush it. At least, it used to... I haven't needed it lately ;)
Looks interesting :)
Just as an FYI, I read the front page of your project. Starcraft actually runs perfectly under Wine set to emulate Win2K actions in Ubuntu 7.04. I just double-clicked setup, and it installed and ran, everything as it's supposed to be. So, you can play Starcraft under Linux other than with your mod. But I'll definitely keep an eye on it.
You mean Wordpad?