Well, the parent post compared what the employer did to stealing an item from Wal-mart. Thats called the "context" of the post. It got modded as interesting because here in the slashdot hive-mind we say things that that do not have a physical component cannot be stolen. C'mon man, get with the program or face moderation.
I'm sorry, you seem to be missing the point. If there is no physical property involved you can't own it. Are you new here or something? Its taken me a while but I'm fully with the program now. Just to make everything clear:
1. If there is no physical component it cannot be stolen, thieved, pirated, etc. 2. If it is technologically possible it is morally right and should be legal.
So I agree there is no difference. But this is slashdot wackyland so they both should be legal. Get the with program or be threatened with moderation.
Oh wait. Did I mess this one up? Since it involves a poor(er) person instead of a rich(er) person its not ok to mess with their rights relating to the intangible? Dang it, I'll get it right someday.
Because the crime does not involve actual physical property there can be no stealing/theft. It would also be incorrect to label the managers "pirates" since they don't have swords and boats and stuff. And I read slashdot enough to know that there is no such thing as intellectual property. I fail to see a crime here.
If you were under investigation for criminal actions and you began trying to influence your trial by sending letters to the state posing as different or even ficticious people. Do you think they would not slap a fine on you? Or throw you in jail for mail fraud? I believe they would. So why aren't the rules, regulations, and laws being applied equally to both you and the major corporation? That is the question.
Quite the appeal to fear there. If I was being tried for a crime I did not feel I commited I would do everything in my power to influence the people who held the power over my fate. If that meant writing a stock letter and sending it to my friends and asking them to sign it and send it to the governor, I would do it if it would help. As long as it was their honest opinion it should not matter who penned the original. What you are asking for is for laws to NOT be applied to everyone equally. I just want to see that they are. As I asked before, should I be fined $10,000 per letter for defending myself any way I know how? Merely mailing letters is an interference with an investigation?
Mine is that Microsoft was never punished. What's yours?
If one is convicted of a crime one should be punished. This is most certainly true. It appears that once again I am the only one interested in equal protection under the law. Microsoft is a "convicted" monopolist and should face the consequences for that action. However this mailing campagin you are trying to portray as fraud is unrelated. If it even approached an actualy crime you better believe the folks in Utah would have tacked it on. There were aggressively pursuing the case up until the "abuses", after all. In America we believe that being guilty of one count does not make you guily of every crime that has been commited in the history of the world. THIS is where it is easy to detect your blinding hatred.
I'm curious why you think it should be a $10,000 fine per letter? Where did you get that number? I followed your link and I don't think they did anything illegal at all. Sneaky? Sure. Tricky? Ok. Are you saying I have to sign each and every correspondence I ever send with my real name or face a potential $10,000 fine? I couldn't send a letter signed Mike Hawk or Cock Boggle or Dewey Decimal just to mess with my "representatives" or face massive fines?
I have to say you have a pretty warped view of justice. Or maybe in this instance you are just blinded by hate? I don't know, where do you get YHO?
And all of that would be more fun and superior to game such as Call of Duty, how?
I know where you are trying to go, but I'm not coming along. Sure you can give the player morality choices, but they won't mean anything without consequences. If you enforce consequences based on the player's choice, especially when both sets of consequences are negative, you have already taken the player's choice away. Then its called a movie.
I have seen these games. They are all crappy flash things that lead you to a conclusion (typically based on a false dilemma) that the designer wants you "learn". You can't let the player both do what they want and force commentary on them. They are mutually exclusive. Though I would agree that games should be considered art, they are really the first interactive art form. If you start forcing a world view on the player you lose the interactivity. I might as well just go to a movie.
Wow I was trying to get modded and failed. Anyway...
All of that breaks down when you look outside of the scope of games set in reality. Doom III is obviously not set in any real world conflict. The setting is merely another way to enhance the gameplay. If you want to create a creepy horror thing you set it in a Mars base. If you want to encourage the player to drive tanks around an island surrounded by destroyers and aircraft carriers you set it on Wake Island. If you want to force the player to slog through a rice patty watching every step you set it in Vietnam. The setting is only a tool for gameplay.
Can you accurately say that you have more fun as a Nazi or American soldier vs. a person working on a Mars base being overrun with demons vs. a random scientist who gets caught up in some messed up stuff (Half-life)? I can't say I do, but I can say each is different fun. The setting is merely a tool for enhancing gameplay, and possibly another feature for marketing to list. Games are for escaping, not being beaten over the head with the designers view of reality.
Or how about I just communicate that deconstruction is masturbation. Its a game. Its supposed to be fun. Keep your hippy crap out of my games.
If the gaming landscape is so ripe, why not do it? Oh, that's right, because everyone would hate your preachy little game.
The question isn't how to imply an emotional connection. Noone does that because that's called awful game design.
OMFG YOU GOTTA GO BUY THE NEW IRAQ WAR GAME!!!11 IT TOTALLY BUMMED ME OUT ON THE REALITIES OF WAR AND I CRIED ALONE IN MY ROOM FOR LIKE 3 HOURS!!!11 OMFGOMFGOMFGOMFGOFMGOFMG
I watched the video. Its a moving around game? Is this of a certain genre that the Japanese love or something? All I see is a game world and a method of locomotion. Where's the fun button?
This is slashdot so surely someone out there loves importing games and can shed more light here.
So you are saying that in your humble opinion that it is 100% outside of the realm of possibility that the fact that you typically don't pay for games has no effect whatsoever on the value you perceive them to have? And this applies to all 100+ games you have on your Xbox?
You don't think that just maybe already having aquired the game for free might just possibly in some way have a chance that it just might maybe affect your perception of the value of the game?
Didn't miss it at all. But "behaving erratically" sounds like intentionally vague press-speak to me. I just choose not to assume the worst.
As for the rest fo your post, damn right. But naturally the article doesn't mention the presence of any of that, so again, I choose not to assume the worse.
Agreed, but did you RMFP? I said that IF the mental (ie, inside his head) presents itself physically, then fsck the cops. But there are plenty that don't and the article was unclear. All I am saying is skip the appeals to pity and fear-mongering when the article is about partially about privacy and when REALLY the man's privacy was actually being maintained. I'd like to think (well I would like to) the cops don't have a right to dig through the inner workings of my wallet just because I got picked up for a non-violent offense.
So I'm going to guess he is over 21. I'm going to have to ask any future arresting officers to please NOT call my parents. The fam doesn't need to know everytime I get a drunk and disorderly.
The thing about needing medication sucks, but its well within the realm of possibility that his health issue both doesn't present as an actual health issue and renders him unable or unwilling to notify the officers. If thats the case, nothing to see. IF the officers knew something was wrong and still failed to act, well then fsck them.
I carry contact and medical information too, but thats only for use if I am unconscious or otherwise unable to speak for myself. Don't call my mommy just because I get picked up. If the officers dug through the medical records of everyone they picked up, wouldn't we by crying invasion of privacy then too?
The Amped snowboarding games are the only snowboarding simulations out there. Though I think that development team has already been terminated, it makes me sad to think I will have to choose between 2 racing games for my off-season snowboard fun. As that isn't much of a choice at all, I guess that's $50 more per year that stays in my pocket. Bummer.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, you're either too stupid to understand the arguments with respect to IP infringment versus theft, or you're a troll.
That's called a False Dilemma. If you are going to refute me, could you at least try to stick to the fundamental rules of logic? Amateurs.
I never said anything about copyright law.
Well, the parent post compared what the employer did to stealing an item from Wal-mart. Thats called the "context" of the post. It got modded as interesting because here in the slashdot hive-mind we say things that that do not have a physical component cannot be stolen. C'mon man, get with the program or face moderation.
I'm sorry, you seem to be missing the point. If there is no physical property involved you can't own it. Are you new here or something? Its taken me a while but I'm fully with the program now. Just to make everything clear:
1. If there is no physical component it cannot be stolen, thieved, pirated, etc.
2. If it is technologically possible it is morally right and should be legal.
So I agree there is no difference. But this is slashdot wackyland so they both should be legal. Get the with program or be threatened with moderation.
Oh wait. Did I mess this one up? Since it involves a poor(er) person instead of a rich(er) person its not ok to mess with their rights relating to the intangible? Dang it, I'll get it right someday.
Because the crime does not involve actual physical property there can be no stealing/theft. It would also be incorrect to label the managers "pirates" since they don't have swords and boats and stuff. And I read slashdot enough to know that there is no such thing as intellectual property. I fail to see a crime here.
If you were under investigation for criminal actions and you began trying to influence your trial by sending letters to the state posing as different or even ficticious people. Do you think they would not slap a fine on you? Or throw you in jail for mail fraud? I believe they would. So why aren't the rules, regulations, and laws being applied equally to both you and the major corporation? That is the question.
Quite the appeal to fear there. If I was being tried for a crime I did not feel I commited I would do everything in my power to influence the people who held the power over my fate. If that meant writing a stock letter and sending it to my friends and asking them to sign it and send it to the governor, I would do it if it would help. As long as it was their honest opinion it should not matter who penned the original. What you are asking for is for laws to NOT be applied to everyone equally. I just want to see that they are. As I asked before, should I be fined $10,000 per letter for defending myself any way I know how? Merely mailing letters is an interference with an investigation?
Mine is that Microsoft was never punished. What's yours?
If one is convicted of a crime one should be punished. This is most certainly true. It appears that once again I am the only one interested in equal protection under the law. Microsoft is a "convicted" monopolist and should face the consequences for that action. However this mailing campagin you are trying to portray as fraud is unrelated. If it even approached an actualy crime you better believe the folks in Utah would have tacked it on. There were aggressively pursuing the case up until the "abuses", after all. In America we believe that being guilty of one count does not make you guily of every crime that has been commited in the history of the world. THIS is where it is easy to detect your blinding hatred.
I'm curious why you think it should be a $10,000 fine per letter? Where did you get that number? I followed your link and I don't think they did anything illegal at all. Sneaky? Sure. Tricky? Ok. Are you saying I have to sign each and every correspondence I ever send with my real name or face a potential $10,000 fine? I couldn't send a letter signed Mike Hawk or Cock Boggle or Dewey Decimal just to mess with my "representatives" or face massive fines?
I have to say you have a pretty warped view of justice. Or maybe in this instance you are just blinded by hate? I don't know, where do you get YHO?
First, just because it's paper-style doesn't mean it can't be vastly different from the original.
No, its because its Nintendo that it can't be vastly different than the original.
Their new motto is: Since we are running out of new ways to sell you the same old crap, can we literally just resell you the same old crap?
And all of that would be more fun and superior to game such as Call of Duty, how?
I know where you are trying to go, but I'm not coming along. Sure you can give the player morality choices, but they won't mean anything without consequences. If you enforce consequences based on the player's choice, especially when both sets of consequences are negative, you have already taken the player's choice away. Then its called a movie.
try lobbying your representatives to raise taxes and spend it on more police presence
Wow. We have a democrat notion of raising taxes but a republican notion of increasing police power in the same sentence. My brain hurts.
Instead lets just ask nicely that people stop committing crimes. That'll work too.
surely it's the responsibility of no-one except (potential) criminals who may be there
If its really their responsibility to keep people from the parks it sure sounds like they are doing a great job!
I have seen these games. They are all crappy flash things that lead you to a conclusion (typically based on a false dilemma) that the designer wants you "learn". You can't let the player both do what they want and force commentary on them. They are mutually exclusive. Though I would agree that games should be considered art, they are really the first interactive art form. If you start forcing a world view on the player you lose the interactivity. I might as well just go to a movie.
Wow I was trying to get modded and failed. Anyway...
All of that breaks down when you look outside of the scope of games set in reality. Doom III is obviously not set in any real world conflict. The setting is merely another way to enhance the gameplay. If you want to create a creepy horror thing you set it in a Mars base. If you want to encourage the player to drive tanks around an island surrounded by destroyers and aircraft carriers you set it on Wake Island. If you want to force the player to slog through a rice patty watching every step you set it in Vietnam. The setting is only a tool for gameplay.
Can you accurately say that you have more fun as a Nazi or American soldier vs. a person working on a Mars base being overrun with demons vs. a random scientist who gets caught up in some messed up stuff (Half-life)? I can't say I do, but I can say each is different fun. The setting is merely a tool for enhancing gameplay, and possibly another feature for marketing to list. Games are for escaping, not being beaten over the head with the designers view of reality.
Or how about I just communicate that deconstruction is masturbation. Its a game. Its supposed to be fun. Keep your hippy crap out of my games.
If the gaming landscape is so ripe, why not do it? Oh, that's right, because everyone would hate your preachy little game.
The question isn't how to imply an emotional connection. Noone does that because that's called awful game design.
OMFG YOU GOTTA GO BUY THE NEW IRAQ WAR GAME!!!11 IT TOTALLY BUMMED ME OUT ON THE REALITIES OF WAR AND I CRIED ALONE IN MY ROOM FOR LIKE 3 HOURS!!!11 OMFGOMFGOMFGOMFGOFMGOFMG
I watched the video. Its a moving around game? Is this of a certain genre that the Japanese love or something? All I see is a game world and a method of locomotion. Where's the fun button?
This is slashdot so surely someone out there loves importing games and can shed more light here.
So you are saying that in your humble opinion that it is 100% outside of the realm of possibility that the fact that you typically don't pay for games has no effect whatsoever on the value you perceive them to have? And this applies to all 100+ games you have on your Xbox?
You don't think that just maybe already having aquired the game for free might just possibly in some way have a chance that it just might maybe affect your perception of the value of the game?
I'll see your college, and raise you a whole city. They got you by about 8 square miles.
Ah the old hometown, I'm so proud. *sniffle*
Um, with excel one can force data types. Or are you talking about a less "bloated" FOSS app?
Data->Validation->Select your type and range. Heh, I just did this yesterday.
Its rudimentary, but noone is backing excel for more than rudimentary data storage.
Good tips. Personally I don't live with the fam but a few times a week they still get junk mail intended for me. I just don't complain to CNN over it.
Its just that they natually know about the D&D when its them calling the cops on me at home for Christmas.
Didn't miss it at all. But "behaving erratically" sounds like intentionally vague press-speak to me. I just choose not to assume the worst.
As for the rest fo your post, damn right. But naturally the article doesn't mention the presence of any of that, so again, I choose not to assume the worse.
Agreed, but did you RMFP? I said that IF the mental (ie, inside his head) presents itself physically, then fsck the cops. But there are plenty that don't and the article was unclear. All I am saying is skip the appeals to pity and fear-mongering when the article is about partially about privacy and when REALLY the man's privacy was actually being maintained. I'd like to think (well I would like to) the cops don't have a right to dig through the inner workings of my wallet just because I got picked up for a non-violent offense.
So I'm going to guess he is over 21. I'm going to have to ask any future arresting officers to please NOT call my parents. The fam doesn't need to know everytime I get a drunk and disorderly.
The thing about needing medication sucks, but its well within the realm of possibility that his health issue both doesn't present as an actual health issue and renders him unable or unwilling to notify the officers. If thats the case, nothing to see. IF the officers knew something was wrong and still failed to act, well then fsck them.
I carry contact and medical information too, but thats only for use if I am unconscious or otherwise unable to speak for myself. Don't call my mommy just because I get picked up. If the officers dug through the medical records of everyone they picked up, wouldn't we by crying invasion of privacy then too?
Um, yeah, those are the 2 crappy choices I'm talking about AC.
The Amped snowboarding games are the only snowboarding simulations out there. Though I think that development team has already been terminated, it makes me sad to think I will have to choose between 2 racing games for my off-season snowboard fun. As that isn't much of a choice at all, I guess that's $50 more per year that stays in my pocket. Bummer.