no. get some perspective. hammers and screwdrivers do not have an end use licence agreement. yes of course it is up to the seller to determine the terms of the sale. its called a contract. Are you suggesting that all contracts are unenforceable? If you rent a house, you sign a form to say you will not do X, Y and Z, maybe not to have any pets, or leave the house unattended. This is not evil it is proof their *is* a free market. You are suggesting that sellers of all products be prevented from setting any conditions on the sale of their products. I guess you would also mean that a EULA should be unenforceable, and thus abolish copyright when it comes to allowing you to make copies of digital products? This is often suggested by people who have never actually created a product...
If I invent product X, who are you, or the government to dictate the terms under which I profit from my invention? The l;egaility of mod chipping is hardly a secret. If you don't like it, go invent your own product and stick a big "mod chip friendly" sticker on it.
i don't think your question will get any response other than a dismissal as irrelevant. Dissatisfaction with the market does not act as an excuse to break the law. There is nobody stopping you starting our own computer hardware company, and making the device you describe. The people making the device you modded have done so on the assumption that they can sell complimentary products for it (games). We all know this. They designed, financed and made the product, it's up to them to determine the terms under which they offer it for sale. If you do not like the terms, don't buy one. Punish restrictive practices through the market, not by breaking the law.
I disagree, I think "welcome to the real world" is easier to remember than "mypasswrd1". sentences evoke memories, visual and auditory, which random lumps of characters or artificially squashed single words do not.
But the fact that every single one of them has different stupid restrictions. I try to limit myself to two common passwords where possible. one is fairly short, one is quite long. Recently I needed a new password for a site. I tried the short one. "your password must be at least X characters". fine, whatever, that's why I use my long one,"your password is too long", so a new, made-up one "your password must contain at least one number". WTF? Can we not at least agree some standard on this? Like many people I end up having to write this new mangled password down, totally defeating its security. I do not see, from a code POV, why it matters that the password is less than X characters. Between 5 and 10 characters? WHY? what is wrong with between 5 and 50 characters? or 5 and 100 characters? Most people can remember a sentence pretty easily, especially a favourite catchphrase or movie quote, remembering "tuesdaypass442" is not so easy, and thus they get written down. I understand the need for minimum pass lengths, but capping the max so low, and so close to the min, is just madness. Give us flexibility in passwords, not some dubious new expensive tech to do the same job.
maybe, but I don't like the fact that the xbox only lets me play games that Microsoft approve of. I've seen microsoft can perfectly good games for 'not being enough like halo'. I like the open nature of the PC, where you can get new genres like the Sims, or MMO games, because there is no gatekeeper deciding what will be fun.
Totally agreed, yet it constantly amazes me how much big AAA develoeprs do NOT want me to see their product. They release the demos exclusive to paid-subscription websites which I am not a member of Then they insist on me 'waiting in a queue' to download it Then they plaster pop up adverts over multiple pages in order for me to get to my download link. Then there is the slow 6k download connection for 'non subscribers', mixed in with streaming ads. Then they try and persuade me to buy it before I've tried it, pester me to 'pre-order' it, and have nag screens I cannot quit.
As a game developer myself, this all seems insane, and naturally I do things the more sensible way. Every one of my games has a free demo, thats always updated to be the very latest code (i patch my server copies of the demo the day I patch the main game). Each one is on a server hosted by me, with an uncapped connection, and a direct.exe link (Download manager friendly), with no adverts, queuing or other bullshit to get between you and my demo. My demo is my advert, I *WANT* everyone to get the demo as quickly and easily, and as hassle free as possible. I cannot understand the mentality of doing it any other way. Just another reason to stick with the PC and not get an XBox I guess:D
They should get Iain M Banks to write star trek. He has all such contradictions worked out. His space explorers don't use primitive 'phasers' but AI-laden self aware miniature floating weapons platforms that can shoot round corners.
CRTs waste tons of space too. That's one reason the first people to mass-use flat panels were in trading rooms where the traders often had multiple screens. less space == smaller offices == cheaper.
"No US phone company will sell you a phone that hasn't been locked to them, and usually also crippled"
That's grim. here in the UK I paid £80 for a Motorola phone. I connect to orange on that phone, using a tariff that I got orange to match, which is from virgin. My monthly bill is around $3, for 2 phones, because I only pay per second of call time. (no monthly fee). There are no 'top up cards' or other bullshit. I get mailed a bill and pay by direct debit.
I flatly refused to buy into any new 'contract'. I just bought a new handset when my old one died.
which is why you are a mathematician. good for you. I'm sure you would be happier about it if you didn't feel bitter about the different choices other people made.
I agree. My post was in reference to the snide comment of an employee (I presume) who took his job *knowing full well it was a salaried position with no future royalty payments*.
Listen, its not complex. If its such a gravy train to become a musician, why don't YOU do it? Actually Paganini was very much motivated by money. I've read a book on his life, and he thought of little else but shagging and earning cash. I'm sure would prefer it if Hendrix had worked in wal-mart to pay his bills, and only gigged at weekends. personally I'm glad he didn't have to.
99.9% of lottery players don't win, but do you think they would play if there was no prize? there would still be amateur musicians for the fun of it yes, but don't expect the next Paganini or Hendrix, because to play like that, you need to dedicate your life to it, not just your weekends.
I have had a regular job, also been self employed, worked as a consultant, and as a company owner. I've also worked as a musician, so I think I'm in a position to compare all the different approaches to making money and risk. I've chosen to run my own company, but I don't whine about people with pensions and regular salaries, that's THEIR choice. In the same way I don't whine about the founders of yahoo or google making a mint off business they started years ago. You think Microsoft won't supply Bill G with share dividends in 50 years time? of course it will./ How is this different for a musician? Its up-front investment as a calculated risk on long term rewards.
It's no better in the UK. Our science minister is Lord Sainsbury. He was given his Lordship, and ministerial position because he is the largest political donor to the ruling party (The labour party). Other scandals include forumla 1 racing being excluded from a tobacco advertising ban because their boss gave the party millions, and god knows what else happens we don't hear about.
All political parties should be financed by small-scale grass roots donations, capped at maybe £100($200) a year. if you can't run your party this way, your party is obviously not popular enough with the people to form a government.
It can be arranged. however, in return, like most musicians you will have to work the first dozen or so years of your life for virtually nothing, with no guarantee whatsoever of ever making a penny from any of it. If you want to get started here are some links:
The entertainment industry is open to anyone, male or female, black or white, and has no real barriers to entry. there are very cheap starter guitars and keyboards out there...
Of course, if like 99.9% of people, you would rather have a safe and steady job with regular salary paid, and not put up with rejection, sarcasm, derision, and general apathy for those years, with no pension, no career structure, and absolutely no certainty of ever making more than minimum wage, then that's fine, but in that case, it's probably only fair not to whine about the 1% (or less) of musicians who were prepared to take all those risks, and saw it pay off for them. It's like whineing about lottery winners, when you weren't prepared to risk your dollar on buying one.
in theory maybe, but farmers tend not to have the kind of finances or legal muscle required to take on a corporate entity the size of monsanto. Really, it should be the governments job to keep an eye on situations like this, but when the political parties are allowed to take corporate donations, the whole system is b0rked before you start.
people are already slowing down their lust for faster, higher spec devices. Hardly anyone I know has any plans to upgrade their PC at any point in the forseeable future, and having just bought a new battery for this laptop, I'll happily keep using it another 3 or 4 years. The final push which would make me get a new one would be a less weight, longer battery life, or lower power drain. Or maybe a solid state drive or something with no fans. As far as computing power goes, my laptop surfs the web, sends email and plays a few low-sys req games, 99% of its features are unused, especially the CD burner. Quieter, lighter, and low-power are the new fast.
wow, your arrogance really helps your point of view, as I'm sure you realise. that's called sarcasm.
So basically you wouldn't give a fuck if all the different forms of entertainment you enjoy right now got wiped out because of other people stealing the work? What a fucked up attitude.
but if the business model you are in is making single player RPG games (for example), you suggest they shift to doing an MMO instead I guess? Nice work, you just wiped out the role playing game industry for everyone who doesn't enjoy level grinds. The alternatively is people actually obey the law. What a concept eh?
the point he made is that it *was* a viable business model assuming people aren't thieves. Even walmart does not have a viable business model if everyone becomes a shoplifter. This much is obvious. By helping everyone become a thief, file sharing has turned a once thriving market into a graveyard, and the honest, legitimate consumer has missed out. Nice work pirates, you fucked up the industry you supposedly liked.
you seem to be under some delusion that we have bittorrent before we had copyright. When you had to copy a book by hand, people didn't copy it for 500 people across the face of the globe while they slept. I thought that was stunningly obvious, and yet still we see this argument repeated on slashdot with a sense of triumphalism. You have to be really delusional to think that copying content without paying for it is sustainable in the middle or long run. Content producers have to eat.
Slashdot Mirror
no. get some perspective. hammers and screwdrivers do not have an end use licence agreement. yes of course it is up to the seller to determine the terms of the sale. its called a contract. Are you suggesting that all contracts are unenforceable? If you rent a house, you sign a form to say you will not do X, Y and Z, maybe not to have any pets, or leave the house unattended. This is not evil it is proof their *is* a free market. You are suggesting that sellers of all products be prevented from setting any conditions on the sale of their products. I guess you would also mean that a EULA should be unenforceable, and thus abolish copyright when it comes to allowing you to make copies of digital products? This is often suggested by people who have never actually created a product...
If I invent product X, who are you, or the government to dictate the terms under which I profit from my invention? The l;egaility of mod chipping is hardly a secret.
If you don't like it, go invent your own product and stick a big "mod chip friendly" sticker on it.
i don't think your question will get any response other than a dismissal as irrelevant. Dissatisfaction with the market does not act as an excuse to break the law. There is nobody stopping you starting our own computer hardware company, and making the device you describe. The people making the device you modded have done so on the assumption that they can sell complimentary products for it (games). We all know this. They designed, financed and made the product, it's up to them to determine the terms under which they offer it for sale. If you do not like the terms, don't buy one. Punish restrictive practices through the market, not by breaking the law.
you just proved my point. which of those 3 is your password again?
absolutely, anything that involves money has its own secure unique one. I just mean for web forums and subscriptions for stuff.
I disagree, I think "welcome to the real world" is easier to remember than "mypasswrd1". sentences evoke memories, visual and auditory, which random lumps of characters or artificially squashed single words do not.
But the fact that every single one of them has different stupid restrictions. I try to limit myself to two common passwords where possible. one is fairly short, one is quite long.
Recently I needed a new password for a site. I tried the short one. "your password must be at least X characters". fine, whatever, that's why I use my long one,"your password is too long", so a new, made-up one "your password must contain at least one number". WTF?
Can we not at least agree some standard on this? Like many people I end up having to write this new mangled password down, totally defeating its security.
I do not see, from a code POV, why it matters that the password is less than X characters. Between 5 and 10 characters? WHY? what is wrong with between 5 and 50 characters? or 5 and 100 characters?
Most people can remember a sentence pretty easily, especially a favourite catchphrase or movie quote, remembering "tuesdaypass442" is not so easy, and thus they get written down. I understand the need for minimum pass lengths, but capping the max so low, and so close to the min, is just madness. Give us flexibility in passwords, not some dubious new expensive tech to do the same job.
maybe, but I don't like the fact that the xbox only lets me play games that Microsoft approve of. I've seen microsoft can perfectly good games for 'not being enough like halo'. I like the open nature of the PC, where you can get new genres like the Sims, or MMO games, because there is no gatekeeper deciding what will be fun.
Totally agreed, yet it constantly amazes me how much big AAA develoeprs do NOT want me to see their product.
.exe link (Download manager friendly), with no adverts, queuing or other bullshit to get between you and my demo. :D
They release the demos exclusive to paid-subscription websites which I am not a member of
Then they insist on me 'waiting in a queue' to download it
Then they plaster pop up adverts over multiple pages in order for me to get to my download link.
Then there is the slow 6k download connection for 'non subscribers', mixed in with streaming ads.
Then they try and persuade me to buy it before I've tried it, pester me to 'pre-order' it, and have nag screens I cannot quit.
As a game developer myself, this all seems insane, and naturally I do things the more sensible way. Every one of my games has a free demo, thats always updated to be the very latest code (i patch my server copies of the demo the day I patch the main game). Each one is on a server hosted by me, with an uncapped connection, and a direct
My demo is my advert, I *WANT* everyone to get the demo as quickly and easily, and as hassle free as possible. I cannot understand the mentality of doing it any other way. Just another reason to stick with the PC and not get an XBox I guess
They should get Iain M Banks to write star trek. He has all such contradictions worked out. His space explorers don't use primitive 'phasers' but AI-laden self aware miniature floating weapons platforms that can shoot round corners.
CRTs waste tons of space too. That's one reason the first people to mass-use flat panels were in trading rooms where the traders often had multiple screens.
less space == smaller offices == cheaper.
"No US phone company will sell you a phone that hasn't been locked to them, and usually also crippled"
That's grim. here in the UK I paid £80 for a Motorola phone. I connect to orange on that phone, using a tariff that I got orange to match, which is from virgin. My monthly bill is around $3, for 2 phones, because I only pay per second of call time. (no monthly fee). There are no 'top up cards' or other bullshit. I get mailed a bill and pay by direct debit.
I flatly refused to buy into any new 'contract'. I just bought a new handset when my old one died.
so as a mathematician, who pays your salary? and are you happy for the same source of income to be applied to all entertainers?
which is why you are a mathematician. good for you. I'm sure you would be happier about it if you didn't feel bitter about the different choices other people made.
I agree. My post was in reference to the snide comment of an employee (I presume) who took his job *knowing full well it was a salaried position with no future royalty payments*.
Listen, its not complex. If its such a gravy train to become a musician, why don't YOU do it?
Actually Paganini was very much motivated by money. I've read a book on his life, and he thought of little else but shagging and earning cash.
I'm sure would prefer it if Hendrix had worked in wal-mart to pay his bills, and only gigged at weekends. personally I'm glad he didn't have to.
99.9% of lottery players don't win, but do you think they would play if there was no prize?
there would still be amateur musicians for the fun of it yes, but don't expect the next Paganini or Hendrix, because to play like that, you need to dedicate your life to it, not just your weekends.
I have had a regular job, also been self employed, worked as a consultant, and as a company owner. I've also worked as a musician, so I think I'm in a position to compare all the different approaches to making money and risk. I've chosen to run my own company, but I don't whine about people with pensions and regular salaries, that's THEIR choice. In the same way I don't whine about the founders of yahoo or google making a mint off business they started years ago. You think Microsoft won't supply Bill G with share dividends in 50 years time? of course it will./ How is this different for a musician? Its up-front investment as a calculated risk on long term rewards.
It's no better in the UK. Our science minister is Lord Sainsbury. He was given his Lordship, and ministerial position because he is the largest political donor to the ruling party (The labour party). Other scandals include forumla 1 racing being excluded from a tobacco advertising ban because their boss gave the party millions, and god knows what else happens we don't hear about.
All political parties should be financed by small-scale grass roots donations, capped at maybe £100($200) a year. if you can't run your party this way, your party is obviously not popular enough with the people to form a government.
It can be arranged. however, in return, like most musicians you will have to work the first dozen or so years of your life for virtually nothing, with no guarantee whatsoever of ever making a penny from any of it.
If you want to get started here are some links:
http://www.guitartricks.com/
http://www.learnpianoonline.com/welcome.html
http://www.studydrums.com/
The entertainment industry is open to anyone, male or female, black or white, and has no real barriers to entry. there are very cheap starter guitars and keyboards out there...
Of course, if like 99.9% of people, you would rather have a safe and steady job with regular salary paid, and not put up with rejection, sarcasm, derision, and general apathy for those years, with no pension, no career structure, and absolutely no certainty of ever making more than minimum wage, then that's fine, but in that case, it's probably only fair not to whine about the 1% (or less) of musicians who were prepared to take all those risks, and saw it pay off for them. It's like whineing about lottery winners, when you weren't prepared to risk your dollar on buying one.
in theory maybe, but farmers tend not to have the kind of finances or legal muscle required to take on a corporate entity the size of monsanto.
Really, it should be the governments job to keep an eye on situations like this, but when the political parties are allowed to take corporate donations, the whole system is b0rked before you start.
people are already slowing down their lust for faster, higher spec devices. Hardly anyone I know has any plans to upgrade their PC at any point in the forseeable future, and having just bought a new battery for this laptop, I'll happily keep using it another 3 or 4 years. The final push which would make me get a new one would be a less weight, longer battery life, or lower power drain. Or maybe a solid state drive or something with no fans. As far as computing power goes, my laptop surfs the web, sends email and plays a few low-sys req games, 99% of its features are unused, especially the CD burner.
Quieter, lighter, and low-power are the new fast.
wow, your arrogance really helps your point of view, as I'm sure you realise.
that's called sarcasm.
So basically you wouldn't give a fuck if all the different forms of entertainment you enjoy right now got wiped out because of other people stealing the work?
What a fucked up attitude.
but if the business model you are in is making single player RPG games (for example), you suggest they shift to doing an MMO instead I guess? Nice work, you just wiped out the role playing game industry for everyone who doesn't enjoy level grinds.
The alternatively is people actually obey the law. What a concept eh?
the point he made is that it *was* a viable business model assuming people aren't thieves. Even walmart does not have a viable business model if everyone becomes a shoplifter. This much is obvious.
By helping everyone become a thief, file sharing has turned a once thriving market into a graveyard, and the honest, legitimate consumer has missed out. Nice work pirates, you fucked up the industry you supposedly liked.
you seem to be under some delusion that we have bittorrent before we had copyright. When you had to copy a book by hand, people didn't copy it for 500 people across the face of the globe while they slept. I thought that was stunningly obvious, and yet still we see this argument repeated on slashdot with a sense of triumphalism.
You have to be really delusional to think that copying content without paying for it is sustainable in the middle or long run. Content producers have to eat.