Also I suppose it is possible to circumvent the ads in single player mode if your pull your dsl/cable/dial-up line out of your computer before you play.
Unless you're playing over the Internet, or if they rig the game so that you can't play unless you have an active Internet connection with a certain port open to receive images.
Money grubbing bastards like this have no soul. They will try everything to squeeze every ounce of money out of you.
I have no problem with people getting paid for good work. However, I don't think they should be able to make unreasonable demands, like forcing you to watch ads during a game you bought and paid for.
The jig is up. Google, and a few others following their example, are about to take the next step forward in Internet integration. I don't think Microsoft is prepared to follow.
And the funny thing is, Microsoft has been pushing for Internet integration since at least Windows 95. Why else would they make the file manager a web browser? However, they're failing because they're telling people how to work, instead of giving them the tools to make it work (like XML file formats) and letting them run with it.
A long-running Java app running under HotSpot will over time grow to be faster than nearly any simmilar C or C++ app.
But what if I want an app to run quickly for a short period of time? Say, a quick game of pong. I'd have to wait for Java to load the VM every time. This is why people think it's slow. Most people aren't running enterprise apps on Unix systems that run for ages and "optimize themselves." People run apps for 10-15 minutes at a time. I don't want to wait 5 minutes to type a letter, I want it now. Now now now now.
The only Java app I used very much was Limewire, and that was slow as hell for four versions of Mac OS X. Even heavily optimized Java that I wrote myself ran slow. And don't get me started about the load times or the ugly window elements.
I also teach my kids to... be strong for those who are not (i.e. Iraq).
So why not invade Saudi Arabia? I mean, people there are living in an oppressive regime. North Korea is much worse than Iraq ever was, and China suppressed a Democratic uprising in 1989 with tanks. We should go help them!
If you think the war in Iraq is primarily about saving the Iraqi people, you're wrong. It is about money first, and freedom second. Why do you think American contractors are getting the money to rebuild it instead of Iraqi contractors?
Why do you think we ignore China's human rights abuses? We ignore them because we have a financial interest in making sure China stays our source of cheap labor. We let the Chinese government keep unions out in return for them also being allowed to destroy political and social movements.
It is courageous and selfless to serve and to risk one's neck to protect the US and make Iraq and the rest of the world a better, safer place.
What's funny is that most of the leftists (socialists and anarchists) want to eliminate large corporations and usury, and a lot of Christian Fundies want to take away our pr0n and gambling and drinking.
Yes, but when there are hecklers at a Kerry event, he mocks them, or uses them as evidence that he's a real threat to the Bush administration. Just because your candidate isn't swift enough to publicly humiliate them on his own doesn't mean they should be handcuffed and carried away.
Poor Georgie, he might find out that people don't like him!
Or make sure the people who do have open wireless access points *know* that they're open and a possible security threat. I'm not about to steal someone's network connection, but if I tell them about the risks and they choose to keep it open, then all the better.
Globally, 80% of all WiFi might be insecure, but locally it can often be much higher. Tooling around with my Powerbook and KisMac I've found that 95% of 802.11 networks in the Harrisburg area are totally open. I'm thinking of starting a weekend gig closing these down. For a modest fee, that is.
Ahh... digital extortion. "I secures dis here network, see, or Clamps here breaks into yous guyses computer and steals yur credit card numbers. Capice?"
The $99 flat fee isn't what's keeping me from getting a TiVo, it's the whole $13/month that's keeping me from getting a TiVo. Or, more exactly, it's the $13/montht that's keeping my fiancée from letting me get a TiVo.
Issue: Fiancée won't let you get a TiVo because the monthly fee is "too expensive" because "we're saving for a wedding."
Solution: Get fiancée addicted to Inuyasha and then show her how TiVo will record every episode.
According to most of the people at the RNC (and DNC), money is speech. Therefore, speech is *not* free. People who have more money have more speech. These guys are, however illegally, seeking to level the playing field.
But they're forgetting that a level playing field and fairness aren't American values anymore.
In light of such actions, how can one associate "liberty" with "liberal" anymore?
One can make the association, if one A) realizes that the actions of a few do not represent the beliefs of the whole, B) uses a non-American definition of "liberal" or C) realizes that most USian "Liberals" are about as far from real progressives as Georgie Boy.
* Some people may indeed try to grab as much as they can, but the rest of the society will not allow it. If they do, then apparently they did not want anarchy after all. You can't force it down people's throats, they (most of them) must want it.
It's a Catch-22: You can't have anarchy until everyone wants it, and nobody will want it until they're all anarchists. And how will society "not allow" it? Will they ask them politely to stop taking all their stuff? No, they'll all gang up and create an authority to stop the aggressor. And then you've completely negated anarchism.
* If somebody plays stereo loud, and the rest of the commune I live in condones it, then so be it, and I'll find one that suits me (assuming I did not like that particular behaviour). If, on the other hand, the rest of the commune also does not like that, the commune will persuade the noise maker to stop such anti-social behaviour. It is as simple as that.
Persuade them how? Punishment? Arrest? Anarchy doesn't take into account the fact that there are a lot of asshats in the world who will do things just because it annoys the neighbors. Unless you're going to infringe on their rights, they'll continue to do it. The Asshat Factor is something every government must contend with, and anarchism simply chooses to ignore it.
As for big groups of people fighting each other, most people do not want to get into a fight. They will try to find a peaceful solution. And if you happen to live with a group of maniacs that will not talk, they're dangerous to your health in any society despite any law enforcement agencies that only appear after the harm is done.
Most people will seek peace. But what about those who don't? We're supposed to ignore them and let them beat us up and take our stuff? Are we supposed to fight them? Are we supposed to make rules to govern their behavior? I'm not saying people are too stupid to govern themselves. I'm saying that a lot of people are bastards who will do whatever they want if there weren't punishments in place.
People will do "shitty" jobs if they don't have to spend the whole of their lifes in them. And there's so much unemployment and people doing totally pointless work in the modern world, that there are many hands to do the work. That means more free time. I for one would welcome e.g. some farm or other physical work, say a week a month, as opposed to being forced to do some totally uninteresting, boring and irrelevant office work 8 hours every weekday for the rest of my life.
Would you clean up roadkill? Just once? I wouldn't. I don't want to go near the stuff. I want to do things that are fun and interesting and that I enjoy. I do other stuff (like boring office work or laundry or cleaning) so that I can have the resources available to do the fun and interesting things I like to do. If there wasn't anyone telling me what to do, and I could just take from other people, I don't think I'd do any work. Ever. And I'm definitely not the only person like this. How would you deal with this? Ignore it? Punish me for being lazy? Have everyone move away so that I could follow them? You need an authority to get things done. I need my fiancée whining about how the laundry stinks so that I do it. I need my dog whining because he needs fed. If he didn't bug me, he'd starve to death.
I have a lot of autonomy at my office. As long as I get my stuff done, they don't bother me. I do this so I don't get hassled. If no one was there to hassle me, I wouldn't get it done. I'd do fun things all day. The threat of losing a job that pays me is what keeps me from doing nothing all day and loving it.
I understand that if everyone took turns picking up garbage, you'd only have to do that one day in your life. Unfortunately, who says it's my turn? That's authority, the exact thing anarchists are against. Decentralization, socialism, direct democracy, human rights and personal freedom are all things that I agree with. However, unless you have someone or a group
Slashdot Mirror
Unless you're playing over the Internet, or if they rig the game so that you can't play unless you have an active Internet connection with a certain port open to receive images.
Money grubbing bastards like this have no soul. They will try everything to squeeze every ounce of money out of you.
I have no problem with people getting paid for good work. However, I don't think they should be able to make unreasonable demands, like forcing you to watch ads during a game you bought and paid for.
How big is "Jupiter Sized?" My mind cannot comprehend such things. Is there a conversion for VW Beetles or Libraries of Congress?
So should we complain when the story's duped in three weeks?
And the funny thing is, Microsoft has been pushing for Internet integration since at least Windows 95. Why else would they make the file manager a web browser? However, they're failing because they're telling people how to work, instead of giving them the tools to make it work (like XML file formats) and letting them run with it.
Not unless you want your cell phone running away with another cell phone.
Of course, if you're upgrading it might be the way to me "The Switch."
But what if I want an app to run quickly for a short period of time? Say, a quick game of pong. I'd have to wait for Java to load the VM every time. This is why people think it's slow. Most people aren't running enterprise apps on Unix systems that run for ages and "optimize themselves." People run apps for 10-15 minutes at a time. I don't want to wait 5 minutes to type a letter, I want it now. Now now now now.
you = stupid.
Obfuscated:
if(!y(c))y=s
The only Java app I used very much was Limewire, and that was slow as hell for four versions of Mac OS X. Even heavily optimized Java that I wrote myself ran slow. And don't get me started about the load times or the ugly window elements.
I didn't believe Windows existed until my dad brought a PC home. I had nightmares for a week.
The terrain is much more rugged, and covered with trees, making it harder to live there.
I use Adium.
If you write me a check for a trillion dollars I'll shut up.
I got a 1310 on my SATs, therefore I should have been elected before Shrub.
So why not invade Saudi Arabia? I mean, people there are living in an oppressive regime. North Korea is much worse than Iraq ever was, and China suppressed a Democratic uprising in 1989 with tanks. We should go help them!
If you think the war in Iraq is primarily about saving the Iraqi people, you're wrong. It is about money first, and freedom second. Why do you think American contractors are getting the money to rebuild it instead of Iraqi contractors?
Why do you think we ignore China's human rights abuses? We ignore them because we have a financial interest in making sure China stays our source of cheap labor. We let the Chinese government keep unions out in return for them also being allowed to destroy political and social movements.
It is courageous and selfless to serve and to risk one's neck to protect the US and make Iraq and the rest of the world a better, safer place.
Dolce et decorum est pro patria mori, eh?
There's something in there for everybody!
Maybe because it's the only source of water for hundreds of miles and people like living there?
Poor Georgie, he might find out that people don't like him!
I'll believe we're at war when they start rationing gasoline.
Or make sure the people who do have open wireless access points *know* that they're open and a possible security threat. I'm not about to steal someone's network connection, but if I tell them about the risks and they choose to keep it open, then all the better.
Ahh... digital extortion. "I secures dis here network, see, or Clamps here breaks into yous guyses computer and steals yur credit card numbers. Capice?"
The $99 flat fee isn't what's keeping me from getting a TiVo, it's the whole $13/month that's keeping me from getting a TiVo. Or, more exactly, it's the $13/montht that's keeping my fiancée from letting me get a TiVo.
Issue: Fiancée won't let you get a TiVo because the monthly fee is "too expensive" because "we're saving for a wedding."
Solution: Get fiancée addicted to Inuyasha and then show her how TiVo will record every episode.
But they're forgetting that a level playing field and fairness aren't American values anymore.
One can make the association, if one A) realizes that the actions of a few do not represent the beliefs of the whole, B) uses a non-American definition of "liberal" or C) realizes that most USian "Liberals" are about as far from real progressives as Georgie Boy.
It's a Catch-22: You can't have anarchy until everyone wants it, and nobody will want it until they're all anarchists. And how will society "not allow" it? Will they ask them politely to stop taking all their stuff? No, they'll all gang up and create an authority to stop the aggressor. And then you've completely negated anarchism.
* If somebody plays stereo loud, and the rest of the commune I live in condones it, then so be it, and I'll find one that suits me (assuming I did not like that particular behaviour). If, on the other hand, the rest of the commune also does not like that, the commune will persuade the noise maker to stop such anti-social behaviour. It is as simple as that.
Persuade them how? Punishment? Arrest? Anarchy doesn't take into account the fact that there are a lot of asshats in the world who will do things just because it annoys the neighbors. Unless you're going to infringe on their rights, they'll continue to do it. The Asshat Factor is something every government must contend with, and anarchism simply chooses to ignore it.
As for big groups of people fighting each other, most people do not want to get into a fight. They will try to find a peaceful solution. And if you happen to live with a group of maniacs that will not talk, they're dangerous to your health in any society despite any law enforcement agencies that only appear after the harm is done.
Most people will seek peace. But what about those who don't? We're supposed to ignore them and let them beat us up and take our stuff? Are we supposed to fight them? Are we supposed to make rules to govern their behavior? I'm not saying people are too stupid to govern themselves. I'm saying that a lot of people are bastards who will do whatever they want if there weren't punishments in place.
People will do "shitty" jobs if they don't have to spend the whole of their lifes in them. And there's so much unemployment and people doing totally pointless work in the modern world, that there are many hands to do the work. That means more free time. I for one would welcome e.g. some farm or other physical work, say a week a month, as opposed to being forced to do some totally uninteresting, boring and irrelevant office work 8 hours every weekday for the rest of my life.
Would you clean up roadkill? Just once? I wouldn't. I don't want to go near the stuff. I want to do things that are fun and interesting and that I enjoy. I do other stuff (like boring office work or laundry or cleaning) so that I can have the resources available to do the fun and interesting things I like to do. If there wasn't anyone telling me what to do, and I could just take from other people, I don't think I'd do any work. Ever. And I'm definitely not the only person like this. How would you deal with this? Ignore it? Punish me for being lazy? Have everyone move away so that I could follow them? You need an authority to get things done. I need my fiancée whining about how the laundry stinks so that I do it. I need my dog whining because he needs fed. If he didn't bug me, he'd starve to death.
I have a lot of autonomy at my office. As long as I get my stuff done, they don't bother me. I do this so I don't get hassled. If no one was there to hassle me, I wouldn't get it done. I'd do fun things all day. The threat of losing a job that pays me is what keeps me from doing nothing all day and loving it.
I understand that if everyone took turns picking up garbage, you'd only have to do that one day in your life. Unfortunately, who says it's my turn? That's authority, the exact thing anarchists are against. Decentralization, socialism, direct democracy, human rights and personal freedom are all things that I agree with. However, unless you have someone or a group