When a C-level executive says they want something, do you really think a rank-and-file IT worker, or even the IT manager, is going to get to tell them "no"?
Amazing how you figured that out within a minute of this being posted, yet the Slashdot "editors" apparently didn't even bother to check. These people get paid, don't they??
Then you're basically asking for an ecosystem that doesn't exist. Either create it yourself, wait for someone who will, or deal with what you've got now.
If you think people won't be able to pirate your games just because they're on a "closed controlled environment," though, you're smoking something.
How much has your game really been pirated? I noticed it costs $1. Are you just assuming it's being pirated because hardly anyone is buying it? I know of no game that I'd waste time pirating if it was $1. Cheaper just to buy it. (Same with music these days. Why pirate when it's so cheap and convenient?)
Nonsense. I buy plenty of games even though I know perfectly well how to get every last one of them for free. If you were right, there would be no gaming industry at all, because no one would pay for any games, ever (or so few would pay that the industry would collapse.)
You should always be skeptical when you read about some "recent exciting discovery." That's usually code for "we have no idea if this is remotely practical on a large scale, and we need to look into it further." Never bet the future on some impressive new discovery--most of them don't actually pan out.
It's not just the rise on sea level, but the destruction of arable land, which will decimate the food supply and drive people from their homes. In the developed world, sure, we can cope (albeit painfully.) Places that already struggle to feed their people? They're basically fucked.
Yup. I'm always skeptical of this doom-and-gloom sort of crap, anyway. I went through all that with Bush, and somehow, the country survived. Unless Obama really is Satan incarnate (or a socialist Kenyan Muslim terrorist, I'm not sure which is worse), then there's not too much to worry about--at least nothing of the apocalyptic proportions people like the submitter would have us believe.
Yeah, especially since the summary turned out to be a lot of baseless hysteria, and the EO is actually about protecting our communications systems in the event of an emergency--not the government "seizing" them.
I'm thinking you haven't dealt much with Amazon Marketplace, because it is virtually a clone of eBay's seller model. You don't have to be a brick-and-mortar store or anything like that to be on Amazon Marketplace--you can be a small-time seller operating out of your garage. In that case, you aren't going to spending much (any?) money worrying about real-time inventory updating through Amazon's API.
Sure, Amazon could require everyone to use it... and then see the number of sellers participating in Marketplace dry up in a hurry.
Strictly speaking, the President can get in a lot of trouble if he is seen to be deliberately not enforcing the law. His role as Executive is indeed to enforce the laws that Congress passes, so if he simply ignores a law he can be brought up on charges for neglecting the duty of his office. Andrew Johnson got impeached, partly for his refusal to enforce a law duly passed by Congress.
That said, Congress isn't inclined to impeach the President for failing to enforce more trivial legislation, but they are within their power to impeach if they believe the President is not "faithfully executing" the laws duly passed by the Congress.
Bush wiggled around this with his "signing statements," which were his interpretation of how laws were to be enforced. Obama has done the same. Their Constitutionality and overall legality have yet to be tested.
You're assuming that just because there's an API, the customer's POS system (or whatever else they may be using) can talk to it without any additional work. A small retailer has not the time, expertise, or money to program something that updates their inventory through Amazon's API. We aren't talking just about huge chains here, but little Mom & Pop stores and people selling things out of their garage. They may well be tracking inventory on paper, which means manually updating the numbers with Amazon.
Some people seem to live in a fantasy land where absolutely everything is electronically tracked without any human intervention. That is still the exception, not the rule, especially when dealing with small-time sellers who aren't going to have sophisticated equipment or staff programmers. Many things are still done on paper, or small POS systems that don't integrate with much beyond Excel.
Meh. Every President at least as far back as JFK has issued Executive Orders like this, giving the President broad powers to seize all sorts of stuff should there ever be a "national emergency." It's unclear whether they are Constitutional or whether anyone would follow orders to enforce them.
I'm not thrilled with Obama doing it, but let's not pretend this is some novel, new thing that previous Presidents wouldn't have dared.
And if you were using the "old" system, in which you have to manually adjust prices, the same (or worse) wouldn't happen?
Every time you put in a new SKU, you should be setting its "minimum reserve" price.
I'm not sure how Amazon handles this in the automated pricing system, but it shouldn't work out to be any worse in terms of lost opportunities than the existing system (in which the price never changes whatsoever unless you go in and change it yourself.)
I think you missed that it's not adherence to Calvinism specifically that's the issue, but that Calvinist doctrine subconsciously pervades so much of our culture and political discourse. Hardly anyone would describe themselves as "Calvinist" in this country, even if they unthinkingly (even unknowingly) buy into its core principles.
Slashdot Mirror
When a C-level executive says they want something, do you really think a rank-and-file IT worker, or even the IT manager, is going to get to tell them "no"?
The phones aren't being replaced, wi-fi is just an added feature. They'll still work as payphones.
Amazing how you figured that out within a minute of this being posted, yet the Slashdot "editors" apparently didn't even bother to check. These people get paid, don't they??
By your logic, no one should be buying PC games since it's an open platform and there's no built-in DRM... yet they sell plenty.
Population's going to control itself soon enough. (Maybe not soon enough, depending on whom you ask.)
Then you're basically asking for an ecosystem that doesn't exist. Either create it yourself, wait for someone who will, or deal with what you've got now.
If you think people won't be able to pirate your games just because they're on a "closed controlled environment," though, you're smoking something.
How much has your game really been pirated? I noticed it costs $1. Are you just assuming it's being pirated because hardly anyone is buying it? I know of no game that I'd waste time pirating if it was $1. Cheaper just to buy it. (Same with music these days. Why pirate when it's so cheap and convenient?)
Heh. I was trying to be charitable!
An excellent point. Climate change is going to create a hell of a lot of refugees that no one will be equipped to deal with. :(
Nonsense. I buy plenty of games even though I know perfectly well how to get every last one of them for free. If you were right, there would be no gaming industry at all, because no one would pay for any games, ever (or so few would pay that the industry would collapse.)
You should always be skeptical when you read about some "recent exciting discovery." That's usually code for "we have no idea if this is remotely practical on a large scale, and we need to look into it further." Never bet the future on some impressive new discovery--most of them don't actually pan out.
It's not just the rise on sea level, but the destruction of arable land, which will decimate the food supply and drive people from their homes. In the developed world, sure, we can cope (albeit painfully.) Places that already struggle to feed their people? They're basically fucked.
Define "loser" in this context. A game that doesn't live up to what the users expected, or what?
If they're doing that by helping to promote games people want... what's the problem?
Yup. I'm always skeptical of this doom-and-gloom sort of crap, anyway. I went through all that with Bush, and somehow, the country survived. Unless Obama really is Satan incarnate (or a socialist Kenyan Muslim terrorist, I'm not sure which is worse), then there's not too much to worry about--at least nothing of the apocalyptic proportions people like the submitter would have us believe.
Yeah, especially since the summary turned out to be a lot of baseless hysteria, and the EO is actually about protecting our communications systems in the event of an emergency--not the government "seizing" them.
I'm thinking you haven't dealt much with Amazon Marketplace, because it is virtually a clone of eBay's seller model. You don't have to be a brick-and-mortar store or anything like that to be on Amazon Marketplace--you can be a small-time seller operating out of your garage. In that case, you aren't going to spending much (any?) money worrying about real-time inventory updating through Amazon's API.
Sure, Amazon could require everyone to use it... and then see the number of sellers participating in Marketplace dry up in a hurry.
True. He is center-right, or a "moderate" if you prefer.
Strictly speaking, the President can get in a lot of trouble if he is seen to be deliberately not enforcing the law. His role as Executive is indeed to enforce the laws that Congress passes, so if he simply ignores a law he can be brought up on charges for neglecting the duty of his office. Andrew Johnson got impeached, partly for his refusal to enforce a law duly passed by Congress.
That said, Congress isn't inclined to impeach the President for failing to enforce more trivial legislation, but they are within their power to impeach if they believe the President is not "faithfully executing" the laws duly passed by the Congress.
Bush wiggled around this with his "signing statements," which were his interpretation of how laws were to be enforced. Obama has done the same. Their Constitutionality and overall legality have yet to be tested.
Given that the previous EOs long these lines never amounted to anything, why assume that this one will? Because Obama's an EVIL LIBRUL? Or what?
But usually it only takes one check to balance it out. ;)
You're assuming that just because there's an API, the customer's POS system (or whatever else they may be using) can talk to it without any additional work. A small retailer has not the time, expertise, or money to program something that updates their inventory through Amazon's API. We aren't talking just about huge chains here, but little Mom & Pop stores and people selling things out of their garage. They may well be tracking inventory on paper, which means manually updating the numbers with Amazon.
Some people seem to live in a fantasy land where absolutely everything is electronically tracked without any human intervention. That is still the exception, not the rule, especially when dealing with small-time sellers who aren't going to have sophisticated equipment or staff programmers. Many things are still done on paper, or small POS systems that don't integrate with much beyond Excel.
Meh. Every President at least as far back as JFK has issued Executive Orders like this, giving the President broad powers to seize all sorts of stuff should there ever be a "national emergency." It's unclear whether they are Constitutional or whether anyone would follow orders to enforce them.
I'm not thrilled with Obama doing it, but let's not pretend this is some novel, new thing that previous Presidents wouldn't have dared.
And if you were using the "old" system, in which you have to manually adjust prices, the same (or worse) wouldn't happen?
Every time you put in a new SKU, you should be setting its "minimum reserve" price.
I'm not sure how Amazon handles this in the automated pricing system, but it shouldn't work out to be any worse in terms of lost opportunities than the existing system (in which the price never changes whatsoever unless you go in and change it yourself.)
I think you missed that it's not adherence to Calvinism specifically that's the issue, but that Calvinist doctrine subconsciously pervades so much of our culture and political discourse. Hardly anyone would describe themselves as "Calvinist" in this country, even if they unthinkingly (even unknowingly) buy into its core principles.
Yup, and I doubt Amazon would take that lying down--instead, they would take it out on the sellers.