Eve is very much based on the work that came before it (Elite, and Homeworld) and that particular genre of game is going to (and does) appeal to a very specific audience. Elite is going to be competing with Eve.
That's not true. Having looked at Eve previously I have no desire to play it. I'm very keen to play Elite though. They are not the same audience.
What Elite wants to do is allow you to fly the ship free-form. Fine, but that is a lot more information to transmit to each and every client on-grid (because you end up transmitting real-time coordinates). Good luck. Once Elite has 1000+ ship space battles
None of the realtime MMORPGs are stopped by this challenge.
Their constitution hasn't changed since he tried to overthrown the government. At least not before he had them change the constitution to allow his multiple re-elections. What kind of system allows criminals to hold such high and important offices?
The then President, Perez, was himself the product of a coup. And he went on to be a corrupt butcher. A coup is a political act, it's not a crime, other than in the eyes of those who support the original corrupt regime.
You would not be able to run a military coup in the US and then run for president later, when it failed.
The laws of the USA are certainly no standard for morality.
it was very much the intent of the founding fathers that gun ownership, above all else is to prevent the tyranny of the government over the populous.
No, their concern was the tyranny of "the crown". i.e. Foreign governments, not the US one. The "militia" was a necessity because the amendment was written in a window of time between the revolutionary army being disbanded, and a standing army being set up.
Currently, copyright includes "distribution" where you must be authorized to sell the item.
No, it reserves the right to distribute "copies". It doesn't reserve the right for redistributing those copies. Again, the fundamental right is to control copies made, not distribution.
I've had some "not for resale" books with the front cover removed, as they are supposed to be when they are no longer for sale. It was "illegal" for me to buy that book. Illegal because someone violated a contract, and the rules are such that contract violations are are now crimes, enforced by the government.
Not so. First sale doctrine means that if you bought that book, you can sell it on.
If that CD contains software, it is illegal (without permission) to rent it out.
Again, no it's not. Only copying from that CD would be illegal, unless the copyright holder permitted it. For example plenty of game shops rent out games for consoles on CDs.
Renting and selling are both distribution, and are regulated.
Of course there are many laws governing distribution. But we're just talking copyright here. And there it only regulates where distribution implies copying. I've been consistent in pointing out that it's perfectly OK to rent, provided it doesn't involve copying.
Diane Feinstein - wrong way round. She used to believe in carrying, and did in the early 70s. Having experienced 2 assasinations, she came to her senses and now opposes guns. No hypocrisy there.
Michael Bloomberg - High office, with a security detail of trained cops or security professionals is not inconsistent with the belief that there should be more control of guns in the civilian population. In the UK, we have a complete ban on civilian ownership of handguns. That's not inconsistent with having specialist cops that are armed.
Likewise David Gregory, though your claim is even weaker.
Thanks for demonstrating that indeed the government doesn't just decide on whatever it likes, but actually there is a whole judicial system behind it, including rights of appeals.
Your opinion on whether these particular complex cases were just is neither here nor there.
The fact that Venezuela has a president who was arrested and convicted of a failed military coup in the 90's just goes to show how messed up their political system is.
Guns are not the problem. The problem is, unsurprisingly, people. Violent people will find ways to commit violence no matter what tools are in their disposal. Just look at the school stabbing in China
The one the same day as the Sandy Hook massacre? Where roughly the same number of people were attacked, but not a single one died?
How the fuck can you imagine that says guns are not a problem?
The truth is you want to own guns, and you'll make up any stupid argument to support your desire.
So I can't rent the song, I can only rent hardware with the song on it?
No. They could rent you the song and lend you the device. Heck, no need even for the device, they could rent you the original CD. But you can't hold an MP3 song in your hand, so you need a medium to carry the original copy on. (or an authorised copy). You can't make an additional copy, because no matter how much you want it to be true, that isn't renting, that's copying.
"You can rent a car, but only if you also rent the dealership for the day as well."
Slashdot is famous for bad car analogies. But that's possibly the worst ever.
No. The implication is that anyone who "borrows" it can make a copy.
Bullshit. As mentioned there is no problem with renting a CD.
I would expect, based on people being arrested for selling pre-loaded MP3 players, that no, you wouldn't be able to rent an MP3 player with songs on them as part of a large commercial retail business plan.
Bad assumption, given that renting isn't the same as selling.
then you're not renting the item in question - you're being forced to rent something else.
Guess what, if you want to buy propane gas, you have to hire the cylinder. It's be great to just buy the gas on it's own, but you'll never get it home.
Are you completely thick? You can do all the things asked, including renting but you can't copy, other than in ways allowed by the licence or the law.
If you're too dumb or obstinate to find a way to rent without copying, they you're shit out of luck. That's not a problem with digital media, but with you.
Of course they can. They're not consumers with a broken toaster. You want industrial plant fixed or replaced and you have money for it, suppliers will compete to supply it.
It doesn't take a genius to open a history book and find out what happened to every economy who has done what they did, and see what kind of damage it did all in the name of keeping some loudmouth politician employed.
It's not a quip. US law is made largely according to the wishes of multinationals, via the mechanism of lobbyists funding politicians. That is corrupt.
Slashdot Mirror
Eve is very much based on the work that came before it (Elite, and Homeworld) and that particular genre of game is going to (and does) appeal to a very specific audience. Elite is going to be competing with Eve.
That's not true. Having looked at Eve previously I have no desire to play it. I'm very keen to play Elite though. They are not the same audience.
What Elite wants to do is allow you to fly the ship free-form. Fine, but that is a lot more information to transmit to each and every client on-grid (because you end up transmitting real-time coordinates). Good luck. Once Elite has 1000+ ship space battles
None of the realtime MMORPGs are stopped by this challenge.
Their constitution hasn't changed since he tried to overthrown the government. At least not before he had them change the constitution to allow his multiple re-elections. What kind of system allows criminals to hold such high and important offices?
The then President, Perez, was himself the product of a coup. And he went on to be a corrupt butcher. A coup is a political act, it's not a crime, other than in the eyes of those who support the original corrupt regime.
You would not be able to run a military coup in the US and then run for president later, when it failed.
The laws of the USA are certainly no standard for morality.
it was very much the intent of the founding fathers that gun ownership, above all else is to prevent the tyranny of the government over the populous.
No, their concern was the tyranny of "the crown". i.e. Foreign governments, not the US one. The "militia" was a necessity because the amendment was written in a window of time between the revolutionary army being disbanded, and a standing army being set up.
It's an anachronism.
Currently, copyright includes "distribution" where you must be authorized to sell the item.
No, it reserves the right to distribute "copies". It doesn't reserve the right for redistributing those copies. Again, the fundamental right is to control copies made, not distribution.
I've had some "not for resale" books with the front cover removed, as they are supposed to be when they are no longer for sale. It was "illegal" for me to buy that book. Illegal because someone violated a contract, and the rules are such that contract violations are are now crimes, enforced by the government.
Not so. First sale doctrine means that if you bought that book, you can sell it on.
If that CD contains software, it is illegal (without permission) to rent it out.
Again, no it's not. Only copying from that CD would be illegal, unless the copyright holder permitted it. For example plenty of game shops rent out games for consoles on CDs.
Renting and selling are both distribution, and are regulated.
Of course there are many laws governing distribution. But we're just talking copyright here. And there it only regulates where distribution implies copying. I've been consistent in pointing out that it's perfectly OK to rent, provided it doesn't involve copying.
So have gun control, excepting the stupid zealots. What could possibly go wrong.
Diane Feinstein - wrong way round. She used to believe in carrying, and did in the early 70s. Having experienced 2 assasinations, she came to her senses and now opposes guns. No hypocrisy there.
Michael Bloomberg - High office, with a security detail of trained cops or security professionals is not inconsistent with the belief that there should be more control of guns in the civilian population. In the UK, we have a complete ban on civilian ownership of handguns. That's not inconsistent with having specialist cops that are armed.
Likewise David Gregory, though your claim is even weaker.
Thanks for showing what a stupid claim it was.
Thanks for demonstrating that indeed the government doesn't just decide on whatever it likes, but actually there is a whole judicial system behind it, including rights of appeals.
Your opinion on whether these particular complex cases were just is neither here nor there.
No, the solution is to tell them to go fuck themselves. They haven't got a leg to stand on.
The fact that Venezuela has a president who was arrested and convicted of a failed military coup in the 90's just goes to show how messed up their political system is.
Huh? The USA started out with a revolution.
Name and shame.
It always baffles me that those in favor of banning guns are the very ones that use them.
Always? Give me three examples.
Adding guns to the existing wealth gap, would make the situation worse, not better.
*If* that was the intention of the constitution writers then they were stupid.
However that wasn't their intention.
Guns are not the problem. The problem is, unsurprisingly, people. Violent people will find ways to commit violence no matter what tools are in their disposal. Just look at the school stabbing in China
The one the same day as the Sandy Hook massacre? Where roughly the same number of people were attacked, but not a single one died?
How the fuck can you imagine that says guns are not a problem?
The truth is you want to own guns, and you'll make up any stupid argument to support your desire.
What a twat. The archetype of what's wrong with America.
Civil Disobedience accomplishes nothing on a tit for tat scale
Sure it does.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramblers_Association
So I can't rent the song, I can only rent hardware with the song on it?
No. They could rent you the song and lend you the device. Heck, no need even for the device, they could rent you the original CD. But you can't hold an MP3 song in your hand, so you need a medium to carry the original copy on. (or an authorised copy). You can't make an additional copy, because no matter how much you want it to be true, that isn't renting, that's copying.
"You can rent a car, but only if you also rent the dealership for the day as well."
Slashdot is famous for bad car analogies. But that's possibly the worst ever.
No. The implication is that anyone who "borrows" it can make a copy.
Bullshit. As mentioned there is no problem with renting a CD.
I would expect, based on people being arrested for selling pre-loaded MP3 players, that no, you wouldn't be able to rent an MP3 player with songs on them as part of a large commercial retail business plan.
Bad assumption, given that renting isn't the same as selling.
The thread mentioned corrupt government, not corrupt cops. Different thing.
then you're not renting the item in question - you're being forced to rent something else.
Guess what, if you want to buy propane gas, you have to hire the cylinder. It's be great to just buy the gas on it's own, but you'll never get it home.
Are you completely thick? You can do all the things asked, including renting but you can't copy, other than in ways allowed by the licence or the law.
If you're too dumb or obstinate to find a way to rent without copying, they you're shit out of luck. That's not a problem with digital media, but with you.
Of course they can. They're not consumers with a broken toaster. You want industrial plant fixed or replaced and you have money for it, suppliers will compete to supply it.
So if the government doesn't offer fair terms, we're supposed to just go along with them anyway, right?
I don't know what happens in your country, or indeed what your country is. But generally you can expect a right of appeal to some judiciary body.
Let me know when the state or federal government wants to build a highway through your house and offers you $1 for the land.
Doesn't happen. So if that's the best you can do...
It doesn't take a genius to open a history book and find out what happened to every economy who has done what they did, and see what kind of damage it did all in the name of keeping some loudmouth politician employed.
Every? Give me 3 examples.
Because the US government would find an excuse to bomb it, or fund terrorism in it.
Of course Americans have a right to complain about gas prices. It's just makes them look even more ignorant of the rest of the world when they do so.
It's not a quip. US law is made largely according to the wishes of multinationals, via the mechanism of lobbyists funding politicians. That is corrupt.