I've always just figured it was something people were using as their submited name, to make a statement. Not that it is one distinct person. I could be wrong.
Yeah. except the SSD hard drive and the 2.5 pound weight. And the high resolution screen, which Apple seems to still not consider important (13.3" at 1280 x 800 on the MacBook Air? Lameness).
Fortunately we have a constitution and amendments which prevent the government from slipping too far down the slippery slope. Having laws to prevent minors from accessing certain materials is not a pathway to all out banning of games or mandatory censorship of games -- it comes nowhere near touching the first amendment.
Restricting minors from being able to purchase certain things has nothing to do with our otherwise, agreed, eroding rights. Unless you're a teenager or currently wearing a tinfoil bodysuit.
From what I've seen there's a lot of push to have a legislated ratings system that's legally enforced (Hillary and Lieberman endorsed a measure to ban the selling of M rated games to minors). There have been a few single cases where people proposed complete bans of games. Chuck Schumer of NY, there have been a few other cases of trying to ban games that in any way glorify the killing of police officers, similar to the Body Count/Cop Killer case of the early 90s. These aren't going to succeed pretty clearly on the basis of the first amendment, as illustrated by the Body Count case -- in fact that never even reached the courts as it was voluntarily pulled from shelves by many retailers.
Anyway, I don't think the case for banning/editing/etc games is as strong as you say -- it's more that many parents and legislators are waking up to the fact that games aren't ms pac man and galaga anymore.
No one is telling you what to let your kids play. No one is taking away your right to play any game out there and no one is taking away your responsibility. They're just saying your kid can't go out and buy any game -- if you want them playing GTA, then YOU buy it for them -- the responsibility lies clearly with you. Fortunately we legislate responsibility in that parents are legally responsible for their children.
I'm curious -- how anti-videogame is Ms. Clinton? I've never seen her advocating anything like banning any games, she just seems to be for enforcing content/age restriction laws, similar to ones present in the movie industry which frankly nearly the entire populace agrees with and has no problem with.
Please correct me if I'm wrong. I definitely wouldn't support anyone who would propose banning games like GTA, but I have absolutely no problem with age restriction enforcement. If you want your kid to play GTA, just buy it for them. Simple.
That's great. Now solve the problem for other works than just music. Or do you expect me to make the video games (or film the movie) you just enjoyed live?
It's simple really. What people in this business need to do is offer something that can't be easily replicated at home. In the case of video games perhaps we'll see a return of the arcade in some form. Films? Easy. People will pay to see a good film on a huge screen. Probably we'll no longer see actors being paid 20 million dollars for a film. That's ok with me.
Distribution isn't the main cost burden. And until we live in a utopia where everything is free, any work will have costs associated with its production. Copyright helps us relieve that cost, eliminating copyright just forces the producer to eat it whole.
Of course there are costs associated with production. An existing band can tour to recoup these expenses, an up-and-coming band can, just as is done today, get a contract -- only now contracts won't be based on record sales* so much as future tour income. This business is always going to be a gamble to some extent.
I understand your point that copyright could be considered a valid legal construct but the fact is, it's over. Media is just too easy to copy these days and DRM either flat out doesn't work or is Draconian in its restrictions. All of the entertainment industry is going to need to reassess what they are offering -- perhaps it will take a little creativity to come up with some new methods of selling their product, but frankly, moral and legal issues aside (as they are swept aside daily by millions) they have little choice.
*(The fact that Radiohead's new album hit #1 despite being available online for months tells us that there is still a market for physical media and the artwork/liner notes that goes with it -- even with music freely available to download there will be some record sales)
I'd like to express my support for the Mr. Falkvinger. I look forward to the day when musicians will again be forced to perform live fairly frequently to make a living. I've had enough of this overproduced shit with pitch shifted vocals and talentless anti-creative jingle-like songwriting spawned by the music industry. The concept of copyright in music has no moral basis, other than the fact that technology was discovered to record and reproduce music. Well you know what? We've discovered technology to distribute this music -- how that is any less of a moral justification I don't know.
The days of bands releasing a shitty album every 5 years, touring for 6 months then retiring to their mansion in LA are over, and thank God. Will we see less people going into the business? Yes. And again, thank God -- art should be made by people with a passion for the art, not by people with simplistic dreams of fame who will do anything to get publicity.
Myself and many others still prefer the form factor of the iPod, input device (the tiny joystick ones on the iRiver and Cowon units I've used have driven me insane, and the touchscreen units I've found don't offer enough storage for me) as well as the numerous pieces of accessories available.
I agree with you that the default firmware of the iPod is crippled, which is why I chose to replace it with rockbox. It works quite well I find. I can play my flac and ogg files and all kinds of other cool stuff -- frozen bubble, doom, etc.
Eventually I hope to go with a non Apple player, as I'd like to support a company that supports more open standards, but as it stands now I can't find a player with the same storage:physical size ratio and aa usable of an input device. If anyone has any suggestions I'm open, I'm looking at upgrading from 80GB as soon as something I like comes out, or Rockbox supports the new iPod classic.
"Supporting NFS, rsync, SMB, ftp, and http file access, the ReadyNAS devices have a featureful Web GUI and, apparently new in the Netgear models, SSH access (although SSH may, as in the past, be limited to use as an rsync tunnel)."
Someone actually follows through on an Ask Slashdot, gives us information on how he solved his problem, and at least 3/4 of the replies to this article are either telling him to sell all his books and that he is a greedy asshole or that paper books are dead (HAHAHAHAHA) and to get an ebook reader.
Can't any of you understand that some people like to collect certain things that may not have a lot of value to others? It's hilarious that people will absolutely gush over articles about someone's (functionally useless) vintage computer/console/anything tech collection, but when someone collects books, which can have large monetary, functional, historical and sentimental value, we get a bunch of nerds calling Luddite.
ffs people, thank the guy for giving us some information on a solution to a technical problem. That's what/. is all about.
Slashdot Mirror
C'mon dude, at least site your alleged witticisms
theonion
And I am!
I've always just figured it was something people were using as their submited name, to make a statement. Not that it is one distinct person. I could be wrong.
NERD ALERT
Yeah. except the SSD hard drive and the 2.5 pound weight. And the high resolution screen, which Apple seems to still not consider important (13.3" at 1280 x 800 on the MacBook Air? Lameness).
Doom is a game where you kill the undead. GTA is a bit different.
It's such a fine line between stupid and clever.
Fortunately we have a constitution and amendments which prevent the government from slipping too far down the slippery slope. Having laws to prevent minors from accessing certain materials is not a pathway to all out banning of games or mandatory censorship of games -- it comes nowhere near touching the first amendment.
Restricting minors from being able to purchase certain things has nothing to do with our otherwise, agreed, eroding rights. Unless you're a teenager or currently wearing a tinfoil bodysuit.
From what I've seen there's a lot of push to have a legislated ratings system that's legally enforced (Hillary and Lieberman endorsed a measure to ban the selling of M rated games to minors). There have been a few single cases where people proposed complete bans of games. Chuck Schumer of NY, there have been a few other cases of trying to ban games that in any way glorify the killing of police officers, similar to the Body Count/Cop Killer case of the early 90s. These aren't going to succeed pretty clearly on the basis of the first amendment, as illustrated by the Body Count case -- in fact that never even reached the courts as it was voluntarily pulled from shelves by many retailers.
Anyway, I don't think the case for banning/editing/etc games is as strong as you say -- it's more that many parents and legislators are waking up to the fact that games aren't ms pac man and galaga anymore.
We could fire them? Who's we here?
I'm not seeing how this is a free speech issue. No one is preventing adults from purchasing any kind of game protected under the first amendment.
No one is telling you what to let your kids play. No one is taking away your right to play any game out there and no one is taking away your responsibility. They're just saying your kid can't go out and buy any game -- if you want them playing GTA, then YOU buy it for them -- the responsibility lies clearly with you. Fortunately we legislate responsibility in that parents are legally responsible for their children.
I'm curious -- how anti-videogame is Ms. Clinton? I've never seen her advocating anything like banning any games, she just seems to be for enforcing content/age restriction laws, similar to ones present in the movie industry which frankly nearly the entire populace agrees with and has no problem with.
Please correct me if I'm wrong. I definitely wouldn't support anyone who would propose banning games like GTA, but I have absolutely no problem with age restriction enforcement. If you want your kid to play GTA, just buy it for them. Simple.
Coincidentally 33 also happens to be the average age of loser virgins living in their parents' basement browsing internet forums.
Worst written summary ever?
But it's still a serious pain in the butt to use outside of a non-simple home use situation. Please please correct me if I'm wrong.
It's simple really. What people in this business need to do is offer something that can't be easily replicated at home. In the case of video games perhaps we'll see a return of the arcade in some form. Films? Easy. People will pay to see a good film on a huge screen. Probably we'll no longer see actors being paid 20 million dollars for a film. That's ok with me.
Of course there are costs associated with production. An existing band can tour to recoup these expenses, an up-and-coming band can, just as is done today, get a contract -- only now contracts won't be based on record sales* so much as future tour income. This business is always going to be a gamble to some extent.
I understand your point that copyright could be considered a valid legal construct but the fact is, it's over. Media is just too easy to copy these days and DRM either flat out doesn't work or is Draconian in its restrictions. All of the entertainment industry is going to need to reassess what they are offering -- perhaps it will take a little creativity to come up with some new methods of selling their product, but frankly, moral and legal issues aside (as they are swept aside daily by millions) they have little choice.
*(The fact that Radiohead's new album hit #1 despite being available online for months tells us that there is still a market for physical media and the artwork/liner notes that goes with it -- even with music freely available to download there will be some record sales)
I'd like to express my support for the Mr. Falkvinger. I look forward to the day when musicians will again be forced to perform live fairly frequently to make a living. I've had enough of this overproduced shit with pitch shifted vocals and talentless anti-creative jingle-like songwriting spawned by the music industry. The concept of copyright in music has no moral basis, other than the fact that technology was discovered to record and reproduce music. Well you know what? We've discovered technology to distribute this music -- how that is any less of a moral justification I don't know.
The days of bands releasing a shitty album every 5 years, touring for 6 months then retiring to their mansion in LA are over, and thank God. Will we see less people going into the business? Yes. And again, thank God -- art should be made by people with a passion for the art, not by people with simplistic dreams of fame who will do anything to get publicity.
great posting = displays of complete scientific ignorance? Fascinating.
And where did he go to school? Just want to make sure my future children never go there.
So they were wrong about one thing in 3 decades. Big deal.
And you might be even dumber than both.
Myself and many others still prefer the form factor of the iPod, input device (the tiny joystick ones on the iRiver and Cowon units I've used have driven me insane, and the touchscreen units I've found don't offer enough storage for me) as well as the numerous pieces of accessories available.
I agree with you that the default firmware of the iPod is crippled, which is why I chose to replace it with rockbox. It works quite well I find. I can play my flac and ogg files and all kinds of other cool stuff -- frozen bubble, doom, etc.
Eventually I hope to go with a non Apple player, as I'd like to support a company that supports more open standards, but as it stands now I can't find a player with the same storage:physical size ratio and aa usable of an input device. If anyone has any suggestions I'm open, I'm looking at upgrading from 80GB as soon as something I like comes out, or Rockbox supports the new iPod classic.
"Supporting NFS, rsync, SMB, ftp, and http file access, the ReadyNAS devices have a featureful Web GUI and, apparently new in the Netgear models, SSH access (although SSH may, as in the past, be limited to use as an rsync tunnel)."
Wow, I was expecting some sort of ingenuity, not some dude plucking on a video card fan.
This is much more impressive: http://youtube.com/watch?v=0rA-zhTJuFU
Someone actually follows through on an Ask Slashdot, gives us information on how he solved his problem, and at least 3/4 of the replies to this article are either telling him to sell all his books and that he is a greedy asshole or that paper books are dead (HAHAHAHAHA) and to get an ebook reader.
/. is all about.
Can't any of you understand that some people like to collect certain things that may not have a lot of value to others? It's hilarious that people will absolutely gush over articles about someone's (functionally useless) vintage computer/console/anything tech collection, but when someone collects books, which can have large monetary, functional, historical and sentimental value, we get a bunch of nerds calling Luddite.
ffs people, thank the guy for giving us some information on a solution to a technical problem. That's what