This is true. I've known about people who have faked results, made up statistics.
I hear ya; its like any technology or bit of knowledge, you can use it to educate, or you can use it to your advantage.
I wanna see the breakdown of funds provided for these studies, because the operation on your neck for without symptoms is kinda freaky. Something smacks of marketing being infused with real observation and analysis.
Now now, anybody who didn't change hardware for a year is using it for a fairly specialized purpose. Was this your normal box? I mean, windows makes you restart your computer when you apply patches, so what gives?
The long waiting line stab. Yes, its longer. But in many ways, only for people who have enough time and money on their hands to participate in online blabbery. Its a substantially shorter wait to people who don't have enough money to go to a doctor at all.
> ATM's do log your passwords (otherwise they wouldn't work), but you have a reasonable expectation that your password won't be compromised because either 1.) your bank owns it or 2.) a 3rd party with a reputation on the line owns it. It is in both parties' interests to maintain trust with you so they can continue to profit from you.
Who cares about the bank? I took them up on the offer for an ATM, but I own the land, so I keylogged passwords, and then they moved on when they discovered I did so.
Still, you're okay that I'm not in the legal wrong for logging your ATM password?
The way America treats training kids for resaponsible sexual relationships, you'd think they train Air Force pilots by blindfolding them until their dropped into the cockpit of a f14 they've never used before and asked politely to engage the enemy.
Actually, the fact that there isn't a third option more to my liking isn't a fact at all, its a false dichotomy, and a complete logistical flaw to your point.
If I own an ATM, should I be able to keylog your ATM password?
Ownership doesn't have a fucking single thing to do with it. I assume that where you work, the land is privately owned. Is the owner of that property allowed to do things to you that are against the law? No.
This ownership bullshit is such a weak argument, especially since it appears that the extention of the argument is that the government apparently shouldn't be able to create laws that dictate the way people treat folks who use their private property. The law supercededs ownership rights, and thank for that, otherwise we'd have a tough time going after child pornographers, drug labs, etc on private property.
But hey, if you support the notion that the laws should be set around the singular wants of private owners, you're invited to my house for a beati - er, tea party.
Not surprising, but still pretty damn funny. I'm fairly impressed tho, I really would have thought Microsoft wouldn't think itself able to afford this kind of press.
I understand what you're trying to say with your sig, but when you're as smug as you seem to be, you lose the priviledge of calling somebody else on their biases.
That out of the way, capitalism is about capitalizing labour; that is, putting people together that create more value than if they worked seperately. That is the fundamental reason why we CAN sell things; we're able to capitalize labour and create things for less cost than would be born upon people if everybody created said thing individually.
Statements like your are grossly off the mark. BSD licenses, any other open source licenses that allow you to use the source but not have to open up your own, have helped many a person make money. What folks like you fail to realize is that you use the term open source as if its a catch all for anybody creating software for free. In fact, irony of ironies, the patent system was designed to FORCE your methods and secrets in the open in return for protection from the government. So who's being anticapitalist now? The very tennants of innovation in capitalism are strongly tied to having people share information. The anti-capitalist yahoo's of whom you speak simply have a much broader, more historically acturate understanding of the balance between technological progress and motivation to innovate. I'm not against selling stuff, I'm not against capitalism, I'm simply suggesting that once the fear dies down in a decade or so, and code itself becomes more commoditized, it will be in the interest of those who wanna make a shit load of money to patent software based on the source, not a description of what the thing does.
Look at early patents; its not what you can do, its HOW you do it. Its the means, not the end. Nobody could patent the generation of electricity; only METHODs for generating electriciy. I predict that at the rate of current software patent filing, litigation will become too expensive for the market versus the costs of opening up source in order to protect your invention. I guess thats ironic, given people's fear of open source licenses.
Anyone have the story of MS trying to buy that E-Card company (Blue Mountain or something?), and the next version of Outlook had some bug in it that would silently delete email coming from that domain?
No, I'm not claiming it happened, but it does ring a bell, and your post reminded me of it.
I'd just like to add to this; the GC is much closer to to what the XBox can do than the PS2 is to the GC.
I own a GC, and it makes the PS2 look like a gameboy in most cases. The improvement from GC to XBox is marginal, in my opinion, although the library is obviously radically different. I'm just going by some of the cross platform games here, like Burnout 2 (fuck them for not releasing 3 and Revenge on GC), Soul Calibur, etc.
I'd have to say you're out of your mind if you subjectively compare the capabilities of each platform and put the PS2 in with the Xbox and GC. This isn't even a point worth arguing; the PS2 came out long before GC and XBox, and on 90% of all games (obviously, the ones that come out on all three, even if it was made for PS2 then ported to GC/Xbox, make it the clearest from an apples to apples standpoint), there is no comparison.
Your point is taken, and true, but my point still stands; the best PS2 games do not stand up to the best Xbox or GC games. I own a PS2 and a GC, and have played many a same game on both, and I think only somebody whos looking for an argument would claim that the PS2 stands up to everything the GC and XBox do.
The PS2 is a dandy platform, tons of fun games, and is capable of some very sweet looking games (God of War, I'm looking at you) but there's a reason why draw distance was doubled or tripled, textures made sharper, models made in higher poly counts in the Xbox version of GTA: SA.
> All anyone wanted to talk about was the KillZone trailer.
Unfortunatly, Sony drove home the very antithesis of what progressive gaming should be.
Using flashy, prerendered stuff to sell videogames is the equivilent of what Hollywood is going through right now; Celebrities and large budgets don't sell movies. Good movies sell movies.
The buying public is usually a little slow to come around on quality of product versus quality of packaging, but its happening in the movie industry right now, and I won't be surprised if it happens in this next generation of consoles. If the reaction to KillZone is any indication tho, we have a ways to go. It was a fucking cool scene, but to actually use it as the basis of what to expect from the PS3 would be an error of extthe highest order.
If HDTV meant anything to the Nintendo consumer base, they'd have shunned the GC for Xbox.
Really, I think IGN whining for HDTV is a product of Matt and the other cube.ign.com guys being sick and tired of not being able to compare dick sizes with the xbox and ps2 staff.
Nintendo never was about the hardware; and the fact that PS2 fucking blows chunks from a technological standpoint vs the Xbox and the GC provides a good example of how much of a red herring HDTV is.
Games, market perception, and release timing.. thats where its at. The vast majority of users I've met couldn't even tell you the PS2 was less powerful than the Game Cube, so how is anybody but the home theatre crowd going to care whether the console sports HDTV. I simply don't think they will. I think ign.com vastly overestimates their consumer base's desire for cutting edge home theatre gear.
Is it just me, or am I the only one completely freakin annoyed with DVD menus? One out of every two has a DVD menu that is absolutely infuriating from a usability perspective. Half the time I'm guessing at what is about to happen, as there appears to be not one freakin convention in the industry as to how DVD menus should be laid out, operate, and respond. I appears to be a totally 'make-work' industry, and nobody can convince me that the production of fancy interfaces doesn't cost a little extra. I'm not saying you can't figure them out after a little fumbling, but sheesh, I'm buying a movie and some comentary, not a magazine that happens to contain a movie.
ARGH. Probably one of my absolute top peeves of the last 10 years of technology. Its enough to make one weep for the comforting sight of a simple, nondescript blinking 12:00.
As for Java, I don't care what it is. I hope to god that interface creation is done through SOME kind of standardized framework or toolkit so at least widgets can at least act, if not look similar, DVD to DVD.
I know I'm asking for a lot tho, because it really seems to me that there are a lot of things in our technilogical world that are done simply because somebody sees a potential way to make money and successfully sells the problem (standardized DVD menus, in this case, the horror) to an industry.
> Indeed, there are economic repercussions from extra redundancy. That's where the free market steps it. It will result in redundancy equilibrium: the amount of redundancy the marketplace is willing to financially bare. In this case, there is a possibility that their two lines were not enough, and the redundancy equilibrium may now shift to three lines as a result of this systemic failure.
So you're saying that 2 didn't work; but 3 will definately be worth the costs? I wish they'd thought of that when they went from 1 to 2...
> Is this another nail in the coffin of paid content on the internet?
There's no such thing as free information. How can slashdot possibly print the above with a straight face; their information is 'free', but the content is highly dictated by commercial interests. Any content with advertising in it is not free. How about 'another nail in the coffin for subscriber supported unbiased editorial and news content?'
I cannot believe the shit being passed off as news. The Odd News page seems to be the very antithesis of what we need; and yet, we flock to it in droves since real news often doesn't taste so good going down.
Slashdot Mirror
This is true. I've known about people who have faked results, made up statistics.
I hear ya; its like any technology or bit of knowledge, you can use it to educate, or you can use it to your advantage.
I wanna see the breakdown of funds provided for these studies, because the operation on your neck for without symptoms is kinda freaky. Something smacks of marketing being infused with real observation and analysis.
Now now, anybody who didn't change hardware for a year is using it for a fairly specialized purpose. Was this your normal box? I mean, windows makes you restart your computer when you apply patches, so what gives?
The long waiting line stab. Yes, its longer. But in many ways, only for people who have enough time and money on their hands to participate in online blabbery. Its a substantially shorter wait to people who don't have enough money to go to a doctor at all.
> ATM's do log your passwords (otherwise they wouldn't work), but you have a reasonable expectation that your password won't be compromised because either 1.) your bank owns it or 2.) a 3rd party with a reputation on the line owns it. It is in both parties' interests to maintain trust with you so they can continue to profit from you.
Who cares about the bank? I took them up on the offer for an ATM, but I own the land, so I keylogged passwords, and then they moved on when they discovered I did so.
Still, you're okay that I'm not in the legal wrong for logging your ATM password?
> Secondly, the extra security has gotten Rawlings front page articles on CNN, NYT, BBC, etc. etc. building up the book hype.
Drive an expensive car and get noticed.
The way America treats training kids for resaponsible sexual relationships, you'd think they train Air Force pilots by blindfolding them until their dropped into the cockpit of a f14 they've never used before and asked politely to engage the enemy.
Sorry, but CRTC rules state that any Bryan Adams imagery is punishable by a 500,000 buck fine. Even if its a posting 'malfunction'.
Actually, the fact that there isn't a third option more to my liking isn't a fact at all, its a false dichotomy, and a complete logistical flaw to your point.
Please try again.
> Customization rocks!
Is there any way to 'roll' your config into an easy install for others? Customization rocks, but distribution rules.
> Show up to work, do your fucking job.
I take it you're keylogged at work?
If I own an ATM, should I be able to keylog your ATM password?
Ownership doesn't have a fucking single thing to do with it. I assume that where you work, the land is privately owned. Is the owner of that property allowed to do things to you that are against the law? No.
This ownership bullshit is such a weak argument, especially since it appears that the extention of the argument is that the government apparently shouldn't be able to create laws that dictate the way people treat folks who use their private property. The law supercededs ownership rights, and thank for that, otherwise we'd have a tough time going after child pornographers, drug labs, etc on private property.
But hey, if you support the notion that the laws should be set around the singular wants of private owners, you're invited to my house for a beati - er, tea party.
Not surprising, but still pretty damn funny. I'm fairly impressed tho, I really would have thought Microsoft wouldn't think itself able to afford this kind of press.
Its like .. different people have differing opinions here! RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!
I understand what you're trying to say with your sig, but when you're as smug as you seem to be, you lose the priviledge of calling somebody else on their biases.
That out of the way, capitalism is about capitalizing labour; that is, putting people together that create more value than if they worked seperately. That is the fundamental reason why we CAN sell things; we're able to capitalize labour and create things for less cost than would be born upon people if everybody created said thing individually.
Statements like your are grossly off the mark. BSD licenses, any other open source licenses that allow you to use the source but not have to open up your own, have helped many a person make money. What folks like you fail to realize is that you use the term open source as if its a catch all for anybody creating software for free. In fact, irony of ironies, the patent system was designed to FORCE your methods and secrets in the open in return for protection from the government. So who's being anticapitalist now? The very tennants of innovation in capitalism are strongly tied to having people share information. The anti-capitalist yahoo's of whom you speak simply have a much broader, more historically acturate understanding of the balance between technological progress and motivation to innovate. I'm not against selling stuff, I'm not against capitalism, I'm simply suggesting that once the fear dies down in a decade or so, and code itself becomes more commoditized, it will be in the interest of those who wanna make a shit load of money to patent software based on the source, not a description of what the thing does.
Look at early patents; its not what you can do, its HOW you do it. Its the means, not the end. Nobody could patent the generation of electricity; only METHODs for generating electriciy. I predict that at the rate of current software patent filing, litigation will become too expensive for the market versus the costs of opening up source in order to protect your invention. I guess thats ironic, given people's fear of open source licenses.
I get it, we just need spammers who encourage us to live healthy lifestyles:
G_t outside now! Exercise! Stop using y0ur com_uter!
and shakespear donged a dozen fractal
nevermind is the people to much building
for Jill never news to many home funding
http://wexxx.shasz13.com/fsss/sm11/epl.cgi
Given that the very purpose of spam is often to sell products that are essentially empty promises, I'm going to write this study off as moot.
Like Face Off? Pen testers are going to have to start carrying around a dozen doves or so to release at the moment of hackage!
Anyone have the story of MS trying to buy that E-Card company (Blue Mountain or something?), and the next version of Outlook had some bug in it that would silently delete email coming from that domain?
No, I'm not claiming it happened, but it does ring a bell, and your post reminded me of it.
The problem is that some people just want to see the right thing done, rather than just walking away from illegal or unethical behaviour.
I know, it sickens me too.
I'd just like to add to this; the GC is much closer to to what the XBox can do than the PS2 is to the GC.
I own a GC, and it makes the PS2 look like a gameboy in most cases. The improvement from GC to XBox is marginal, in my opinion, although the library is obviously radically different. I'm just going by some of the cross platform games here, like Burnout 2 (fuck them for not releasing 3 and Revenge on GC), Soul Calibur, etc.
No shit. Really?! /end sarcasm
I'd have to say you're out of your mind if you subjectively compare the capabilities of each platform and put the PS2 in with the Xbox and GC. This isn't even a point worth arguing; the PS2 came out long before GC and XBox, and on 90% of all games (obviously, the ones that come out on all three, even if it was made for PS2 then ported to GC/Xbox, make it the clearest from an apples to apples standpoint), there is no comparison.
Your point is taken, and true, but my point still stands; the best PS2 games do not stand up to the best Xbox or GC games. I own a PS2 and a GC, and have played many a same game on both, and I think only somebody whos looking for an argument would claim that the PS2 stands up to everything the GC and XBox do.
The PS2 is a dandy platform, tons of fun games, and is capable of some very sweet looking games (God of War, I'm looking at you) but there's a reason why draw distance was doubled or tripled, textures made sharper, models made in higher poly counts in the Xbox version of GTA: SA.
> All anyone wanted to talk about was the KillZone trailer.
Unfortunatly, Sony drove home the very antithesis of what progressive gaming should be.
Using flashy, prerendered stuff to sell videogames is the equivilent of what Hollywood is going through right now; Celebrities and large budgets don't sell movies. Good movies sell movies.
The buying public is usually a little slow to come around on quality of product versus quality of packaging, but its happening in the movie industry right now, and I won't be surprised if it happens in this next generation of consoles. If the reaction to KillZone is any indication tho, we have a ways to go. It was a fucking cool scene, but to actually use it as the basis of what to expect from the PS3 would be an error of extthe highest order.
If HDTV meant anything to the Nintendo consumer base, they'd have shunned the GC for Xbox.
.. thats where its at. The vast majority of users I've met couldn't even tell you the PS2 was less powerful than the Game Cube, so how is anybody but the home theatre crowd going to care whether the console sports HDTV. I simply don't think they will. I think ign.com vastly overestimates their consumer base's desire for cutting edge home theatre gear.
Really, I think IGN whining for HDTV is a product of Matt and the other cube.ign.com guys being sick and tired of not being able to compare dick sizes with the xbox and ps2 staff.
Nintendo never was about the hardware; and the fact that PS2 fucking blows chunks from a technological standpoint vs the Xbox and the GC provides a good example of how much of a red herring HDTV is.
Games, market perception, and release timing
Is it just me, or am I the only one completely freakin annoyed with DVD menus? One out of every two has a DVD menu that is absolutely infuriating from a usability perspective. Half the time I'm guessing at what is about to happen, as there appears to be not one freakin convention in the industry as to how DVD menus should be laid out, operate, and respond. I appears to be a totally 'make-work' industry, and nobody can convince me that the production of fancy interfaces doesn't cost a little extra. I'm not saying you can't figure them out after a little fumbling, but sheesh, I'm buying a movie and some comentary, not a magazine that happens to contain a movie.
ARGH. Probably one of my absolute top peeves of the last 10 years of technology. Its enough to make one weep for the comforting sight of a simple, nondescript blinking 12:00.
As for Java, I don't care what it is. I hope to god that interface creation is done through SOME kind of standardized framework or toolkit so at least widgets can at least act, if not look similar, DVD to DVD.
I know I'm asking for a lot tho, because it really seems to me that there are a lot of things in our technilogical world that are done simply because somebody sees a potential way to make money and successfully sells the problem (standardized DVD menus, in this case, the horror) to an industry.
> Indeed, there are economic repercussions from extra redundancy. That's where the free market steps it. It will result in redundancy equilibrium: the amount of redundancy the marketplace is willing to financially bare. In this case, there is a possibility that their two lines were not enough, and the redundancy equilibrium may now shift to three lines as a result of this systemic failure.
...
So you're saying that 2 didn't work; but 3 will definately be worth the costs? I wish they'd thought of that when they went from 1 to 2
> Is this another nail in the coffin of paid content on the internet?
There's no such thing as free information. How can slashdot possibly print the above with a straight face; their information is 'free', but the content is highly dictated by commercial interests. Any content with advertising in it is not free. How about 'another nail in the coffin for subscriber supported unbiased editorial and news content?'
I cannot believe the shit being passed off as news. The Odd News page seems to be the very antithesis of what we need; and yet, we flock to it in droves since real news often doesn't taste so good going down.