There won't be client software the same way there is with AOL. There will be a very small piece of software and it will use the user's current browser.
It's not that it spins backwards (counter-clockwise versus clockwise or whatever) - the X-Box DVD's read from the outside-in, versus the inside-out. Please note that this not adds to their proprietariness and makes it harder to pirate
Does that really make it that much more difficult? Shouldn't it be relatively simple to rip a straight.bin of the disc, reading backwards (inside to outside) and then burn what you ripped? I suppose there are complications with where the data starts and stops...
It's the same problem I had with Jackson's remedy in the MS litigation, that OEMs who don't want to include a bundled MS app must be refunded the percentage of the fee corresponding to the percentage of operating system's total bytes that the app constitutes. What happens when MS includes a ten-DVD "tutorial" with its distribution, thereby severly diluting the byte-percentage of any of the functional parts of the OS (IE and the rest, not to call them functional;).
If Microsoft did this, couldn't OEMs just opt out of including this "tutorial", and thereby get a refund of almost the entire price of the operating system, effectively getting a serious discount?
Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems that such a scenario wouldn't be in Microsoft's best interests.
Disclaimer: I am of the persuasion that the MP3/Napster phenomenon is Not A Bad Thing.
I'm sure I'll probably get royally flamed for this, but I've gone for long enough without ranting.
I'm really tired of this banter about copying mp3s being stealing or that we shouldn't be doing it because we didn't pay for the music or whatever. Every argument I've heard crumbles in the face of one simple fact. You can't stop people from copying mp3s.
Sure, perhaps people ought to be searching out indie artists or whatever if they feel that the price of CDs is too high. Perhaps. But that's not going to happen and it's not realistic to stand around and whine about it. No one is going to stop the spread of mp3s. They're here and they're not going away. If you like you can cry and whimper, but you can't change it.
There's also the consideration that this is a free market, and technology has now changed in such a way to allow people to freely and easily copy mp3s instead of paying ridiculous prices for CDs. Whether or not it's legal or ethical is moot. You can't regulate it, so it becomes a factor that influences the choices people make. Sorry, that's the breaks.
Now.. if you find a way to actually regulate the spread of pirated mp3s, then I'll be more than happy to discuss ethics. Until then, however, this entire debate is ridiculous because it doesn't matter. Mp3s are here. Say hello or don't; they're not leaving.
This silly behavior by the RIAA and filthy rich artists comes off to me as some form of denial.
P.S. Since this is an old discussion, and I'm curious as to how people will react to this, I'm going to repost it verbatim to a newer napster-related article when I find a good time. Hope that doesn't piss anyone off (then again, if it does, tough.. I almost care about my karma).
With almost all unix systems, you have "cc" or some varient, and "make" and some varient. Additionally tools, such as automake, etc, help with system dependances, but in general, all you need to do to build an OS program is untar,./configure, and make all.
I might be completely mislead here, but didn't Cygnus implement a nice package of all those pretty utilities (and even bash) for Windows?
A game programmer isn't the equivalent of a movie industry star. S/he's the equivalent of a grip or at most a set designer
I'm going to have to disagree heartily with that one.
While there are some programmers who only do janitorial programming, I think the major coders behind a game could probably be more accurately compared to the director and/or producer of a movie.
Sure, they're not an actor, because it's not their pretty face that sells a game. It's their ideas and their imagination.
Actually, I don't think it matters all that much
on
Geeks vs. Nerds
·
· Score: 1
I used to be part of the "geek" crowd on this issue.. but I've seen enough people who prefer "nerd" that it's clear that there isn't any consensus to just agree with.
What I think really matters is whether or not someone is proclaiming themselves a geek or a nerd. As soon as you use the word to label yourself, it's clear that it's not carrying severe negative connotations anymore (at least to the proclaimer).
Also, self-proclaimed geeks or nerds calling someone else a geek or a nerd are clearly not trying to use the word as an insult.
Furthermore, someone calling someone else a geek or a nerd who already calls themself that is failing to insult them.
That's just the way I see it, anyway. They only have negative connotations when we let them.
Will the Slashdot demigods start censoring comments that dare to criticize RedHat?
Then again, this site has never been a source of unbiased information.
No one forces you to read Slashdot. If you don't like their methods, leave. They are free to operate the site the way they want to. It's their site, not yours.
Yes, this should be fixed. If you don't care about Linux, more than half of all news here is not interesting to you.
Isn't that backwards?
Shouldn't it rather be changed so that there is more news that doesn't just cover linux? Perhaps I'm biased because of my own interests here, but I don't think Linux is the end-all. I don't think slashdot set out to cover just Linux.
Slashdot Mirror
There won't be client software the same way there is with AOL. There will be a very small piece of software and it will use the user's current browser.
These are information rather than knowledge.
www.discogs.com is useful for electronic music release information.
www.onelook.com is a good dictionary.
P.S. m-w.com has a toolbar (like the google toolbar) which I find very useful.
Fsck that!
:)
I don't agree with what he's saying either, but you're basically advocating downward moderatoin based on disagreement.
Isn't that just a little form of censorship? (uh oh, buzzword)
Then again, I guess you might be kidding. In that case, I take it back.
It's the same problem I had with Jackson's remedy in the MS litigation, that OEMs who don't want to include a bundled MS app must be refunded the percentage of the fee corresponding to the percentage of operating system's total bytes that the app constitutes. What happens when MS includes a ten-DVD "tutorial" with its distribution, thereby severly diluting the byte-percentage of any of the functional parts of the OS (IE and the rest, not to call them functional ;).
If Microsoft did this, couldn't OEMs just opt out of including this "tutorial", and thereby get a refund of almost the entire price of the operating system, effectively getting a serious discount?
Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems that such a scenario wouldn't be in Microsoft's best interests.
Disclaimer: I am of the persuasion that the MP3/Napster phenomenon is Not A Bad Thing.
I'm sure I'll probably get royally flamed for this, but I've gone for long enough without ranting.
I'm really tired of this banter about copying mp3s being stealing or that we shouldn't be doing it because we didn't pay for the music or whatever. Every argument I've heard crumbles in the face of one simple fact. You can't stop people from copying mp3s.
Sure, perhaps people ought to be searching out indie artists or whatever if they feel that the price of CDs is too high. Perhaps. But that's not going to happen and it's not realistic to stand around and whine about it. No one is going to stop the spread of mp3s. They're here and they're not going away. If you like you can cry and whimper, but you can't change it.
There's also the consideration that this is a free market, and technology has now changed in such a way to allow people to freely and easily copy mp3s instead of paying ridiculous prices for CDs. Whether or not it's legal or ethical is moot. You can't regulate it, so it becomes a factor that influences the choices people make. Sorry, that's the breaks.
Now.. if you find a way to actually regulate the spread of pirated mp3s, then I'll be more than happy to discuss ethics. Until then, however, this entire debate is ridiculous because it doesn't matter. Mp3s are here. Say hello or don't; they're not leaving.
This silly behavior by the RIAA and filthy rich artists comes off to me as some form of denial.
P.S. Since this is an old discussion, and I'm curious as to how people will react to this, I'm going to repost it verbatim to a newer napster-related article when I find a good time. Hope that doesn't piss anyone off (then again, if it does, tough.. I almost care about my karma).
OKAY! I'm stupid.. that was already mentioned.
Please don't moderate me down, I repent!
With almost all unix systems, you have "cc" or some varient, and "make" and some varient. Additionally tools, such as automake, etc, help with system dependances, but in general, all you need to do to build an OS program is untar, ./configure, and make all.
I might be completely mislead here, but didn't Cygnus implement a nice package of all those pretty utilities (and even bash) for Windows?
If so, it sure is a start!
A game programmer isn't the equivalent of a movie industry star. S/he's the equivalent of a grip or at most a set designer
I'm going to have to disagree heartily with that one.
While there are some programmers who only do janitorial programming, I think the major coders behind a game could probably be more accurately compared to the director and/or producer of a movie.
Sure, they're not an actor, because it's not their pretty face that sells a game. It's their ideas and their imagination.
I used to be part of the "geek" crowd on this issue.. but I've seen enough people who prefer "nerd" that it's clear that there isn't any consensus to just agree with.
What I think really matters is whether or not someone is proclaiming themselves a geek or a nerd. As soon as you use the word to label yourself, it's clear that it's not carrying severe negative connotations anymore (at least to the proclaimer).
Also, self-proclaimed geeks or nerds calling someone else a geek or a nerd are clearly not trying to use the word as an insult.
Furthermore, someone calling someone else a geek or a nerd who already calls themself that is failing to insult them.
That's just the way I see it, anyway. They only have negative connotations when we let them.
Will the Slashdot demigods start censoring comments that dare to criticize RedHat?
Then again, this site has never been a source of unbiased information.
No one forces you to read Slashdot. If you don't like their methods, leave. They are free to operate the site the way they want to. It's their site, not yours.
Yes, this should be fixed. If you don't care about Linux, more than half of all news here is not interesting to you.
Isn't that backwards?
Shouldn't it rather be changed so that there is more news that doesn't just cover linux? Perhaps I'm biased because of my own interests here, but I don't think Linux is the end-all. I don't think slashdot set out to cover just Linux.