I'd rather have the ability to flesh out the story rather than be frustrated by a bloody insane enemy in a game that stops me from enjoying the story until I go to a few ruins and grind levels. That takes the fun out of the game _and_ the story. Kudos to Oblivion for having the foresight to realize the story was more important than hacking and slashing your way to higher levels and getting a cramp trying to kill a Liche or something similar.
That sort of nonsense was why I gave up on Mass Effect. There may have been a great story in there, but awkward controls of the landing rover and VICIOUS enemies early on preventing the story from becoming entertaining. To each his own. Make it a toggle if you must, but getting rid of it means many people who don't spend 12 hours a day in front of a console will miss out on the story and the hard work developers put into the game.
The video review I saw of Too Human nitpicked over the death sequence (which is the loading sequence hidden by a cutscene... I thought it was clever), and it had trouble with the "story" because the reviewer wasn't familiar with Norse Mythology. Whatever... there is nothing in the story that requires you to have intimate knowledge of the Aesir/Vanir and the interpersonal relationships among the various stories in Norse Mythology. It makes the game much more interesting when you see how they molded a technological skin around Viking lore, but it doesn't take away from the story or the game if you think Baldr is a game from Wizards of the Coast.:)
Okay. Let's get valid. It's just another FPS. It has no discernible story (when it's not a paper-thin attempt to link the games with backstory no one seems to bother caring about), most of the time it's just the same old "shoot everything that moves, and if it doesn't move, pick it up and use it to shoot everything that moves." It doesn't break any technological ground (it's not even 720p on the 360), nor does it bag the cliche's for something fresh. It's not the be-all-end-all revolutionary game for consoles that MS marketroid hype has made it out to be. It's fine if it's popular, and it's certainly find if you like it or if millions like it.
Is it fun for some people? Sure. But don't excuse all criticism of the game as some snooty "back in my day" sort of claims and relegate all people who don't like the game in some sort of club that hate things because they're popular.
Give me an Oblivion or Too Human over Halo any day. Does that make me less intelligent than the Halo crowd? If it makes them sleep better at night... go for it.;)
it only takes a few battles to get used to the targeting. I hate most control schemes on the 360 because I believe the controller was designed by a retarded nutless monkey. But this is intuitive, once you toss out all the Halo schemes you're used to. I prefer the control scheme now, because it allows me to target items with varying weaponry depending upon how far away the enemy might be.
But, like most "new" things, it's not much of a lukewarm reception... people either love it or hate it. *shrug* I think Too Human is overall very good, and I'm really digging the Norse Mythology mixed in with tech. It's clever, and it's fun to see the people you remember from your mythology books come in and out of the story (Thor's my favorite so far...)
What a load of shit. Seriously. Either you're a troll, or you haven't developed a fucking thing. On my desk at work I have 2 PPC apple Powermacs and an intel Mac Pro. I develop software for various _other_ platforms (VxWorks, etc.) using the Apple machines. I also develop GUI's in other languages besides Objective C that work fine on a Mac and have Mac-usability built-in. Yes, it's true.
Labview is one of those languages... but since you're simply a developer of the next version of Solitaire, you wouldn't know about real-world applications and software that actually does something besides making a grocery list.
Developing software that controls R&S Oscilloscopes isn't "Barbie's first Alphabet", but it is something that is pervasive and not part of the typical shareware, pissant consultant, or moronic VB developer's worldview. Don't believe me? Google it... Otherwise put your pedantic moronity back in the box and continue to read Windows Development journals about the next best calendar app. Leave the real development to actual engineers.
I'm not defending Apple's store, iTunes, or whatever else you think you have to do to develop real, deliverable applications on Apple's platform, but I'm here to say you don't. And if you think you do, you either don't know enough about engineering to bother acknowledging, or you have your head so far up Ballmer's ass you can see his tonsils.
Believe me, I've driven one... (I've ridden in more than driven them.. so I can't say how the higher-higher end Lexus are.) Me, I'd prefer to pay less for a Toyota. But I'm not in their demographic because I think $80 for an HDMI cable is insane, and $7 for a cup of coffee is robbery.:) Now that's not saying that Lexus buyers are shallow brand-obsessed morons who can't tell a Camry from an ES whatever... But there are a good many who are.. and Lexus has been able to capitalize on that with Toyota quality to great effect... not to mention higher margins.:)
I do not understand how a car company can share parts with two brands (chassis, body styles, etc.), and those are essential parts, sell them with two different logos and differentiate the price so much that people are not noticing the similarities between them. I'm not singling out Lexus/toyota here, because GM does it, Ford does it... and to a lesser degree Chrysler does it....
The Lincoln pickup truck? Really? It's a rebadged F-150 with some non-essential niceites tacked on the outside... (dunno how substantially revamped the interior is...I'd be willing to bet not all that much). See what I mean, though? It's perception more than it is reality to these buyers... and reviewers of course.
I'm just a Jeep Wrangler guy... *shrug* What do I care about luxury?:D a hard top is luxury for me.... heh.
But it's still a Toyota. Kinda like Scion. Though the latter being an attempt to attract someone besides the 50+ year old folks who love Camrys. The Germans still dominate in the large executive car market, but hey... Lexus makes a pile on the not-so higher ups.;)
Lexus was an attempt to brand "luxury" with a symbol, rather than a separate car line... (and Infiniti as well).. granted you can get a few more minor options on the Lexus versions, but make no mistake it's a Toyota. Cost-conscious people, (ideally not the Lexus market) would be better served with a Toyota at less of a markup... unless they just have to have the "status" that a Lexus brings to the middle income set. It's not the car that's the problem... it's the hype surrounding the brand that is. It's fine if people want to pay extra for a Toyota, all I'm saying is it's still a Toyota.
Real luxury isn't from Japan, but then again, not many people can afford hand-built cars at $400K a pop either.;)
You really do have a comprehension problem, don't you? Do you realize ANYTHING about the labor movement besides what you got from PBS? Apparently not. How much do the heads of the big labor unions get for compensation? They doing it for free? How much bargaining power have the labor unions had since the implementation of sane labor laws? How much arrogance has the union shown in a global economy that every, and I mean EVERY new venture avoids the albatross of unions that cripples Detroit and further subjugates "union" workers to dues-paying homeless people. Don't bother answering any of these, because your opinions are about as useful as nipples on men. And my credentials? I deal with unions almost DAILY. The Aerospace Workers Union. Corrupt... pathetic, and not even CLOSE to having their members' interests in mind even at the collective bargaining table.
Growing up living on food stamps doesn't mean that they aren't NOW rich. He's not 5 anymore, is he? Just because he grew up poor doesn't mean he remembers, cares, or even has a clue about being poor now. And your logic will work for McCain too... he wasn't rich until he married a beer baron. Rich has a way of moving people OUT of their roots, and the politics of america favor those who are filthy rich. Kerry, Edwards (ambulance chaser), Reagan (actor), Bush (oil)... need I go on? Everyone's bought and sold on Capitol Hill and it doesn't matter if your mascot's an Ass or an elephant... THEY DON'T GIVE A SHIT ABOUT YOU. AND THEY NEVER WILL. Is that so hard to see? Apparently so in your case.
So in closing, since you believe that everything anyone says, facts or otherwise, is stupid, there's no convincing you to get the log from your own eye and learn basic courtesy in a discussion. But, like all internet trolls, you feel compelled to be superior to everyone at the other end of your screen and for that, I'm sorry.
One day you'll grow up, learn to discern fact from fallacy, and realize that what you spout now is about as juvenile as humanly possible. Your logic is so flawed, Socrates' tomb just blew up.
And before you pot-kettle-black me, realize that the facts about the two-party system are solid. The mere inference that you don't believe them doesn't make them less true.
If you're so sanctimonious and believe in the american people, why don't YOU run for office? If the Democratic party is indeed the "poor man's friend", you should have no trouble getting to the top spot. That is, unless the filthy rich Howard Dean doesn't cock-block you.
I would suggest a few books about the growth and corruption in organized labor, but you probably wouldn't read them anyway. It'd spoil your panglossian view of the universe.
Do you realize that voting either is not GOOD? Did you miss my entire point? They are BOTH parties out to SCREW YOU and enhance THEIR pocketbooks. And for an aside, give a look-see to the historical realities since WWII, and you'll see the equal opportunity destroyers on both sides of the fence. What you fail to realize is that simply because I said both parties were the same, I didn't mean you could vote for either and get what you want. I meant, rather clearly, that BOTH PARTIES are trying to fuck you. So DON'T VOTE FOR EITHER. It's your power. People who believe that the Labor movement was somehow (post Depression) worth much of anything but hush money and financing the richest 1% is delusional and a very dangerous fool who's blinders happen to be stuck too close to "Air America" and Chomsky.
Get a little perspective, stop spouting the "proletariat" line and realize that we are not going to change a THING until we realize EVERYONE who is in power at this moment IS AGAINST US. Obama, McCain, Clinton... THEY are all TOO rich to give a shit about the American people. Anyone who doesn't see that is a very dangerous fool, my friend.
You are spot on, but I submit that it's even worse than that...
Voting Republican is the same as voting Democrat.
You're voting for the one party system. I've said it 10k times on Slashdot, but it bears repeating... we have a two-party system in name only. The "scary", polarizing issues (class-warfare, abortion, God) are a smokescreen to hide the true nature of the one-party system. Their job, that has been true for as long as I've been alive, is to subjugate, to keep in the dark, and otherwise to create cogs for the massive wheel that is corporatism. The politicians, as Carlin so eloquently said, are there to give us the illusion of choice. The corporations run the show. And the politicians are their puppets. We exist only to consume and be the grist for the mill, so to speak. In their perfect wet-dream of a world, we'd be paying real $ to hum a tune, or for that matter, consume air.
You're oh-so-right. It's a shitty way to live. But our desire for "ooh! shiny!" has done it to us. And our insistence on letting the rich cocksuckers (who couldn't care less if you lived or died, as long as you didn't stain their sidewalk) run the show was icing on the cake.
I'm just as guilty as the next person in terms of buying things. But as I've gotten older, my computers have stayed in one place longer, upgrades are fewer and far more reasonable, and I don't particularly care about the next big gadget. But, I'm not the "target" demographic. I'm too old now to be useful, except to fill the slots necessary for corporations to rake in money and make products that enslave, murder, and generally trample the American dream.
I understand now why Jefferson railed against a non-agrarian society. We lost our self-sufficiency, we lost our ability to weather the tyrannies of government, and we've lost the ability to fight for ourselves and for those less fortunate than us.
...and I blame myself as much as I do "the system."
1) We're talking about carriers who shouldn't be concerned _what_ bits are traveling over their network. If they are concerned, then they should not be allowed to view my data any more than I am theirs. It doesn't matter if it's a wireless network or a big ISP. The bits don't care how they get there. And neither should the company providing the pipe. Frankly, their right-of-way seizure and subsidies to get the infrastructure built in the first place means they have no grounds to claim "it's mine, not yours" since WE the taxpayer made it possible for THEM to get off the ground (and we're paying again for the "privilege"... more on that in a second.)
2) Because we've seen evidence of the erosion firsthand, which makes the 'fallacy' pretty much a fact. If you don't believe that it only requires a few feet into the door before the rest of the restrictions to come down, you're the one clinging to a fallacy. We need only look at the systematic erosion of sanity in copyright to prove this isn't a "fallacy".
3) And they are asking for MY money to use their business. If I pay for it, I expect them to updhold THEIR end of the bargain. It's not a courtesy, it's not a "nice thing they're doing", I'm friggin' paying for it. They have little or no competition, so there is no pressure for them to behave in a manner that values either my business or my money. So the "effort insight and other things" they did (and sometimes got government subsidies and grants of property to do so) is moot. It's about getting what I paid for, not what they think is good for me. They're not my mom.
Let them keep their network for their employees then, if they believe they don't (or can't) meet the needs of their PAYING customers.
You don't particularly know where fanatics stand, because tech (the only fanatics we're interested in at the moment) moves so fast. Granted, the FSF is moving along with it, targeting what it considers "bad" for the internet and computing in general, but in their rapid rate of flowing down tech's river, they have overlooked (or at least glossed over) some of the more pressing matters that we, as like-minded Free Software advocates, find more pressing than the latest fad from Apple.
We need to focus _all_ our attention to net neutrality, the telcos suing cities for municipal wifi rollouts, Trusted Computing, and the increasingly alarming rate at which we "think of the children" and censor the internet.
I'd rather them get in the "face" so to speak of people perpetrating _these_ ills on the world than Apple at the moment. Apple's driving force has been it's Unix Core of MacOSX (which is only now "certified"), and as long as they keep that from going south, their music store, ipod store and "gadget" store can keep their crap.
This particular stunt by the FSF is not helping the bigger problems. We have to fix the plumbing before we re-carpet the living room.:)
And I don't believe that being a firm but polite advocate means "moving to the center." The publicity stunts like this one (albeit not that huge a one, even if they concentrated on one store), don't get the press they need, and only serve to provide negative word-of-mouth anecdotal evidence to the fence-sitters who are unfamiliar with the better, more rational ideas of the FSF. In spite of the kooky things RMS says, the FSF has the good ideas, sound philosophies, and generally non-authoritarian outlook that will win hearts and minds of people disgusted with Apple and Microsoft (and sprint, and verizon, and so on)
We just have to make sure they see all of it, not just the freaky stunts that make us look like gimps.
Good. Swear off Apple forever. I swore off Microsoft forever a long time ago. If you think that apple's at the front of eroding your freedom these days, you are really missing the point.
But that's fine, Apple's successful at the moment, and Microsoft's floundering. So it's no fun to pick on the major violator when they're not doing so great.
All this will do is make the curious view the FSF as just another fringe group with no point. It will not change minds. And the FSF needs to win the hearts and minds, not reinforce your opinion as an FSF supporter.
Preach to the choir much?
But the fact that this has occurred since the days of piano rolls, this particular "infringement" isn't new or innovative... it just applies technology.
Remember the furor over VCRs? Cassette tapes? Radio?
I don't buy that P2P is the reason we are losing freedom. *I* should never lose ANY freedom because of the actions of someone else. This isn't elementary school. CCTV is non-invasive and subject to personal restrictions (no cameras in the toilets, etc.) This is simply, we saw you sharing Abba's "dancing queen" on 27 occasions! You're costing Abba and the industry billions. You are hereby cut off from the internet.
(It's a bit of an extreme example... but you get the idea.)
I blame the industry for not wanting to adapt to technology. Technology moves whether the buggy whip manufacturers want it to or not. And the entertainment industry is not immune to progress. They are fighting it worse than any industry we've seen (since perhaps the dawn of the industrial revolution). And the kicker of it is, they're taking our freedoms down with them.
The system's broken. It's just that simple. I don't advocate infringing on copyright because of it, but it is beyond repair, with corporations perpetually holding everything from the public domain and (at least in the US) undermining the Founding Fathers' view of copyright.
You probably got modded as flamebait (or troll) because you use "whine" and generally talk down to an opinion that differs from yours. Remember the old adage "you can catch more flies with honey than vinegar." (or words to that effect.) That doesn't make your opinion any less relevant, but it also clouds the opposite opinion as somehow less than your own. If that's what you were going for, no problem. But the consequence of that does open one's posts up to moderation negatively. (I know, I've had the same issue in other discussions.)
I am of the camp that advocates ignoring music altogether (and the same goes for movies and TV). The sooner we choke off their lifeline (OUR money) the sooner they'll realize who is more important to them, and at the very least realize that treating _customers_ like criminals does nothing but make them former customers.
I also realize that P2P and other tech used to infringe is not going to kill the industries working so hard to kill the tech. How long has it been since Napster? And they're still around... making billions. They claim (incorrectly of course) that they're on the brink of extinction because of P2P, but we've yet to see anything tank... and with the US opening of "The Dark Knight" proving that a movie people want to see will make money (lots of money), their argument for "impending doom" rings rather hollow.
There's quite a bit more subtle nuances available to discuss on this subject, (who gets the revenue, is it really worth the $ they claim, etc.) but you get the general idea w/r/t your original post.
Besides, if more people thought as you did (and didn't bother "collecting" the drek off P2P they would otherwise not buy in the first place), we'd not have to discuss this at all... and most likely our freedoms wouldn't collectively be dumped into the abyss in the name of "saving an industry from the evil pirates."
I'd rather see the industry be forced to cater to their customers as it should be... rather than the industry strangling its userbase. But that's just a pipedream these days.
So you know someone who did? Your friends/acquaintances/myspace hookups who did that should've known what they were doing, and they wouldn't have broken the damn thing upgrading the RAM. Clearly someone didn't read the manual.... It's not "EVIL EVIL EVIL" Apple. Apple's evil in so many other ways... but this ain't it.
I had a thinkpad that was of the group of "non-user" upgradeable hard drives. If I opened it and put a new one in... even if it was an IBM part, it would've voided my warranty (not that there was much there.) Clearly the laptop was geared towards the "novice" consumer. Meh.. at least it was cheap.;)
So, instead of the blanket statement you made above about "Apple voids warranties"... you could've ended all this with simply saying _SOME_ apple computers don't let you do this. We know that. We also know that not ALL Apple computers have this policy.
Crucial RAM is Apple RAM. I've got two sticks in my Powermac that, with the exception of the Apple logo sticker, are Crucial ram, right down to the part numbers. So, it depends on the computer.... Apple's not alone in this... and your insinuation of a blanket policy was simply trolling. The Apple rep recommended crucial for quality ram (but I knew that already from my PC days...)
Slashdot Mirror
I'd rather have the ability to flesh out the story rather than be frustrated by a bloody insane enemy in a game that stops me from enjoying the story until I go to a few ruins and grind levels. That takes the fun out of the game _and_ the story. Kudos to Oblivion for having the foresight to realize the story was more important than hacking and slashing your way to higher levels and getting a cramp trying to kill a Liche or something similar.
That sort of nonsense was why I gave up on Mass Effect. There may have been a great story in there, but awkward controls of the landing rover and VICIOUS enemies early on preventing the story from becoming entertaining. To each his own. Make it a toggle if you must, but getting rid of it means many people who don't spend 12 hours a day in front of a console will miss out on the story and the hard work developers put into the game.
The video review I saw of Too Human nitpicked over the death sequence (which is the loading sequence hidden by a cutscene... I thought it was clever), and it had trouble with the "story" because the reviewer wasn't familiar with Norse Mythology. Whatever... there is nothing in the story that requires you to have intimate knowledge of the Aesir/Vanir and the interpersonal relationships among the various stories in Norse Mythology. It makes the game much more interesting when you see how they molded a technological skin around Viking lore, but it doesn't take away from the story or the game if you think Baldr is a game from Wizards of the Coast. :)
Okay. Let's get valid. It's just another FPS. It has no discernible story (when it's not a paper-thin attempt to link the games with backstory no one seems to bother caring about), most of the time it's just the same old "shoot everything that moves, and if it doesn't move, pick it up and use it to shoot everything that moves." It doesn't break any technological ground (it's not even 720p on the 360), nor does it bag the cliche's for something fresh. It's not the be-all-end-all revolutionary game for consoles that MS marketroid hype has made it out to be. It's fine if it's popular, and it's certainly find if you like it or if millions like it.
;)
Is it fun for some people? Sure. But don't excuse all criticism of the game as some snooty "back in my day" sort of claims and relegate all people who don't like the game in some sort of club that hate things because they're popular.
Give me an Oblivion or Too Human over Halo any day. Does that make me less intelligent than the Halo crowd? If it makes them sleep better at night... go for it.
it only takes a few battles to get used to the targeting. I hate most control schemes on the 360 because I believe the controller was designed by a retarded nutless monkey. But this is intuitive, once you toss out all the Halo schemes you're used to. I prefer the control scheme now, because it allows me to target items with varying weaponry depending upon how far away the enemy might be.
But, like most "new" things, it's not much of a lukewarm reception... people either love it or hate it. *shrug* I think Too Human is overall very good, and I'm really digging the Norse Mythology mixed in with tech. It's clever, and it's fun to see the people you remember from your mythology books come in and out of the story (Thor's my favorite so far...)
What a load of shit. Seriously. Either you're a troll, or you haven't developed a fucking thing. On my desk at work I have 2 PPC apple Powermacs and an intel Mac Pro. I develop software for various _other_ platforms (VxWorks, etc.) using the Apple machines. I also develop GUI's in other languages besides Objective C that work fine on a Mac and have Mac-usability built-in. Yes, it's true.
Labview is one of those languages... but since you're simply a developer of the next version of Solitaire, you wouldn't know about real-world applications and software that actually does something besides making a grocery list.
Developing software that controls R&S Oscilloscopes isn't "Barbie's first Alphabet", but it is something that is pervasive and not part of the typical shareware, pissant consultant, or moronic VB developer's worldview. Don't believe me? Google it... Otherwise put your pedantic moronity back in the box and continue to read Windows Development journals about the next best calendar app. Leave the real development to actual engineers.
I'm not defending Apple's store, iTunes, or whatever else you think you have to do to develop real, deliverable applications on Apple's platform, but I'm here to say you don't. And if you think you do, you either don't know enough about engineering to bother acknowledging, or you have your head so far up Ballmer's ass you can see his tonsils.
Believe me, I've driven one... (I've ridden in more than driven them.. so I can't say how the higher-higher end Lexus are.) Me, I'd prefer to pay less for a Toyota. But I'm not in their demographic because I think $80 for an HDMI cable is insane, and $7 for a cup of coffee is robbery. :) Now that's not saying that Lexus buyers are shallow brand-obsessed morons who can't tell a Camry from an ES whatever... But there are a good many who are.. and Lexus has been able to capitalize on that with Toyota quality to great effect... not to mention higher margins. :)
:D a hard top is luxury for me.... heh.
:)
I do not understand how a car company can share parts with two brands (chassis, body styles, etc.), and those are essential parts, sell them with two different logos and differentiate the price so much that people are not noticing the similarities between them. I'm not singling out Lexus/toyota here, because GM does it, Ford does it... and to a lesser degree Chrysler does it....
The Lincoln pickup truck? Really? It's a rebadged F-150 with some non-essential niceites tacked on the outside... (dunno how substantially revamped the interior is...I'd be willing to bet not all that much). See what I mean, though? It's perception more than it is reality to these buyers... and reviewers of course.
I'm just a Jeep Wrangler guy... *shrug* What do I care about luxury?
Sorry for drifting off-topic.
But it's still a Toyota. Kinda like Scion. Though the latter being an attempt to attract someone besides the 50+ year old folks who love Camrys. The Germans still dominate in the large executive car market, but hey... Lexus makes a pile on the not-so higher ups. ;)
Lexus was an attempt to brand "luxury" with a symbol, rather than a separate car line... (and Infiniti as well).. granted you can get a few more minor options on the Lexus versions, but make no mistake it's a Toyota. Cost-conscious people, (ideally not the Lexus market) would be better served with a Toyota at less of a markup... unless they just have to have the "status" that a Lexus brings to the middle income set. It's not the car that's the problem... it's the hype surrounding the brand that is. It's fine if people want to pay extra for a Toyota, all I'm saying is it's still a Toyota.
Real luxury isn't from Japan, but then again, not many people can afford hand-built cars at $400K a pop either. ;)
Toyota. Relabeled for the Starbucks and Monster cable crowd.
"apocalypse ponies... apocalypse ponies! Punishment for your sins!!!
"Pestilence pony, you're my favorite..." (or was it death pony?)
You really do have a comprehension problem, don't you? Do you realize ANYTHING about the labor movement besides what you got from PBS? Apparently not. How much do the heads of the big labor unions get for compensation? They doing it for free? How much bargaining power have the labor unions had since the implementation of sane labor laws? How much arrogance has the union shown in a global economy that every, and I mean EVERY new venture avoids the albatross of unions that cripples Detroit and further subjugates "union" workers to dues-paying homeless people. Don't bother answering any of these, because your opinions are about as useful as nipples on men. And my credentials? I deal with unions almost DAILY. The Aerospace Workers Union. Corrupt... pathetic, and not even CLOSE to having their members' interests in mind even at the collective bargaining table.
Growing up living on food stamps doesn't mean that they aren't NOW rich. He's not 5 anymore, is he? Just because he grew up poor doesn't mean he remembers, cares, or even has a clue about being poor now. And your logic will work for McCain too... he wasn't rich until he married a beer baron. Rich has a way of moving people OUT of their roots, and the politics of america favor those who are filthy rich. Kerry, Edwards (ambulance chaser), Reagan (actor), Bush (oil)... need I go on? Everyone's bought and sold on Capitol Hill and it doesn't matter if your mascot's an Ass or an elephant... THEY DON'T GIVE A SHIT ABOUT YOU. AND THEY NEVER WILL. Is that so hard to see? Apparently so in your case.
So in closing, since you believe that everything anyone says, facts or otherwise, is stupid, there's no convincing you to get the log from your own eye and learn basic courtesy in a discussion. But, like all internet trolls, you feel compelled to be superior to everyone at the other end of your screen and for that, I'm sorry.
One day you'll grow up, learn to discern fact from fallacy, and realize that what you spout now is about as juvenile as humanly possible. Your logic is so flawed, Socrates' tomb just blew up.
And before you pot-kettle-black me, realize that the facts about the two-party system are solid. The mere inference that you don't believe them doesn't make them less true.
If you're so sanctimonious and believe in the american people, why don't YOU run for office? If the Democratic party is indeed the "poor man's friend", you should have no trouble getting to the top spot. That is, unless the filthy rich Howard Dean doesn't cock-block you.
I would suggest a few books about the growth and corruption in organized labor, but you probably wouldn't read them anyway. It'd spoil your panglossian view of the universe.
Do you realize that voting either is not GOOD? Did you miss my entire point? They are BOTH parties out to SCREW YOU and enhance THEIR pocketbooks. And for an aside, give a look-see to the historical realities since WWII, and you'll see the equal opportunity destroyers on both sides of the fence. What you fail to realize is that simply because I said both parties were the same, I didn't mean you could vote for either and get what you want. I meant, rather clearly, that BOTH PARTIES are trying to fuck you. So DON'T VOTE FOR EITHER. It's your power. People who believe that the Labor movement was somehow (post Depression) worth much of anything but hush money and financing the richest 1% is delusional and a very dangerous fool who's blinders happen to be stuck too close to "Air America" and Chomsky.
Get a little perspective, stop spouting the "proletariat" line and realize that we are not going to change a THING until we realize EVERYONE who is in power at this moment IS AGAINST US. Obama, McCain, Clinton... THEY are all TOO rich to give a shit about the American people. Anyone who doesn't see that is a very dangerous fool, my friend.
I'm a driver on the Waaaaahmbulance you insensitive CLOD! :-)
You are spot on, but I submit that it's even worse than that...
...and I blame myself as much as I do "the system."
Voting Republican is the same as voting Democrat.
You're voting for the one party system. I've said it 10k times on Slashdot, but it bears repeating... we have a two-party system in name only. The "scary", polarizing issues (class-warfare, abortion, God) are a smokescreen to hide the true nature of the one-party system. Their job, that has been true for as long as I've been alive, is to subjugate, to keep in the dark, and otherwise to create cogs for the massive wheel that is corporatism. The politicians, as Carlin so eloquently said, are there to give us the illusion of choice. The corporations run the show. And the politicians are their puppets. We exist only to consume and be the grist for the mill, so to speak. In their perfect wet-dream of a world, we'd be paying real $ to hum a tune, or for that matter, consume air.
You're oh-so-right. It's a shitty way to live. But our desire for "ooh! shiny!" has done it to us. And our insistence on letting the rich cocksuckers (who couldn't care less if you lived or died, as long as you didn't stain their sidewalk) run the show was icing on the cake.
I'm just as guilty as the next person in terms of buying things. But as I've gotten older, my computers have stayed in one place longer, upgrades are fewer and far more reasonable, and I don't particularly care about the next big gadget. But, I'm not the "target" demographic. I'm too old now to be useful, except to fill the slots necessary for corporations to rake in money and make products that enslave, murder, and generally trample the American dream.
I understand now why Jefferson railed against a non-agrarian society. We lost our self-sufficiency, we lost our ability to weather the tyrannies of government, and we've lost the ability to fight for ourselves and for those less fortunate than us.
Obligatory "Bad Boys" quote... (from the Kurgan!)
:)
"Hey, if your lipshitz, what does your asshole do?"
Thank you, I'm here all week.
and AOL, WebTV, grandma.....
1) We're talking about carriers who shouldn't be concerned _what_ bits are traveling over their network. If they are concerned, then they should not be allowed to view my data any more than I am theirs. It doesn't matter if it's a wireless network or a big ISP. The bits don't care how they get there. And neither should the company providing the pipe. Frankly, their right-of-way seizure and subsidies to get the infrastructure built in the first place means they have no grounds to claim "it's mine, not yours" since WE the taxpayer made it possible for THEM to get off the ground (and we're paying again for the "privilege"... more on that in a second.)
2) Because we've seen evidence of the erosion firsthand, which makes the 'fallacy' pretty much a fact. If you don't believe that it only requires a few feet into the door before the rest of the restrictions to come down, you're the one clinging to a fallacy. We need only look at the systematic erosion of sanity in copyright to prove this isn't a "fallacy".
3) And they are asking for MY money to use their business. If I pay for it, I expect them to updhold THEIR end of the bargain. It's not a courtesy, it's not a "nice thing they're doing", I'm friggin' paying for it. They have little or no competition, so there is no pressure for them to behave in a manner that values either my business or my money. So the "effort insight and other things" they did (and sometimes got government subsidies and grants of property to do so) is moot. It's about getting what I paid for, not what they think is good for me. They're not my mom.
Let them keep their network for their employees then, if they believe they don't (or can't) meet the needs of their PAYING customers.
You don't particularly know where fanatics stand, because tech (the only fanatics we're interested in at the moment) moves so fast. Granted, the FSF is moving along with it, targeting what it considers "bad" for the internet and computing in general, but in their rapid rate of flowing down tech's river, they have overlooked (or at least glossed over) some of the more pressing matters that we, as like-minded Free Software advocates, find more pressing than the latest fad from Apple. We need to focus _all_ our attention to net neutrality, the telcos suing cities for municipal wifi rollouts, Trusted Computing, and the increasingly alarming rate at which we "think of the children" and censor the internet.
:)
I'd rather them get in the "face" so to speak of people perpetrating _these_ ills on the world than Apple at the moment. Apple's driving force has been it's Unix Core of MacOSX (which is only now "certified"), and as long as they keep that from going south, their music store, ipod store and "gadget" store can keep their crap.
This particular stunt by the FSF is not helping the bigger problems. We have to fix the plumbing before we re-carpet the living room.
And I don't believe that being a firm but polite advocate means "moving to the center." The publicity stunts like this one (albeit not that huge a one, even if they concentrated on one store), don't get the press they need, and only serve to provide negative word-of-mouth anecdotal evidence to the fence-sitters who are unfamiliar with the better, more rational ideas of the FSF. In spite of the kooky things RMS says, the FSF has the good ideas, sound philosophies, and generally non-authoritarian outlook that will win hearts and minds of people disgusted with Apple and Microsoft (and sprint, and verizon, and so on)
We just have to make sure they see all of it, not just the freaky stunts that make us look like gimps.
Good. Swear off Apple forever. I swore off Microsoft forever a long time ago. If you think that apple's at the front of eroding your freedom these days, you are really missing the point. But that's fine, Apple's successful at the moment, and Microsoft's floundering. So it's no fun to pick on the major violator when they're not doing so great. All this will do is make the curious view the FSF as just another fringe group with no point. It will not change minds. And the FSF needs to win the hearts and minds, not reinforce your opinion as an FSF supporter. Preach to the choir much?
But the fact that this has occurred since the days of piano rolls, this particular "infringement" isn't new or innovative... it just applies technology.
Remember the furor over VCRs? Cassette tapes? Radio?
I don't buy that P2P is the reason we are losing freedom. *I* should never lose ANY freedom because of the actions of someone else. This isn't elementary school. CCTV is non-invasive and subject to personal restrictions (no cameras in the toilets, etc.) This is simply, we saw you sharing Abba's "dancing queen" on 27 occasions! You're costing Abba and the industry billions. You are hereby cut off from the internet.
(It's a bit of an extreme example... but you get the idea.)
I blame the industry for not wanting to adapt to technology. Technology moves whether the buggy whip manufacturers want it to or not. And the entertainment industry is not immune to progress. They are fighting it worse than any industry we've seen (since perhaps the dawn of the industrial revolution). And the kicker of it is, they're taking our freedoms down with them.
The system's broken. It's just that simple. I don't advocate infringing on copyright because of it, but it is beyond repair, with corporations perpetually holding everything from the public domain and (at least in the US) undermining the Founding Fathers' view of copyright.
You probably got modded as flamebait (or troll) because you use "whine" and generally talk down to an opinion that differs from yours. Remember the old adage "you can catch more flies with honey than vinegar." (or words to that effect.) That doesn't make your opinion any less relevant, but it also clouds the opposite opinion as somehow less than your own. If that's what you were going for, no problem. But the consequence of that does open one's posts up to moderation negatively. (I know, I've had the same issue in other discussions.)
I am of the camp that advocates ignoring music altogether (and the same goes for movies and TV). The sooner we choke off their lifeline (OUR money) the sooner they'll realize who is more important to them, and at the very least realize that treating _customers_ like criminals does nothing but make them former customers.
I also realize that P2P and other tech used to infringe is not going to kill the industries working so hard to kill the tech. How long has it been since Napster? And they're still around... making billions. They claim (incorrectly of course) that they're on the brink of extinction because of P2P, but we've yet to see anything tank... and with the US opening of "The Dark Knight" proving that a movie people want to see will make money (lots of money), their argument for "impending doom" rings rather hollow.
There's quite a bit more subtle nuances available to discuss on this subject, (who gets the revenue, is it really worth the $ they claim, etc.) but you get the general idea w/r/t your original post.
Besides, if more people thought as you did (and didn't bother "collecting" the drek off P2P they would otherwise not buy in the first place), we'd not have to discuss this at all... and most likely our freedoms wouldn't collectively be dumped into the abyss in the name of "saving an industry from the evil pirates."
I'd rather see the industry be forced to cater to their customers as it should be... rather than the industry strangling its userbase. But that's just a pipedream these days.
It mentioned only Microsoft and Nintendo. When did Sony settle?
As for Microsoft, it was a litany of patent claims, apparently...
http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Anascape
I thought Sony's was Immersion's patent on Rumble? (everyone else settled over the rumble but Sony, which is why Sixaxis was born before Dualshock 3.)
As for the suit, what of the analog sticks of say, the Dreamcast? Or perhaps the analog sticks of 3rd party manufacturers like Logitech and Madcatz?
Just wondering....
It's a shame they don't accept little bits of string.
I know, I saw the sign. ;)
The doesn't want the Cuban people subjected to.......
Goatse.cx ...don't you have a heart, you commie?
So you know someone who did? Your friends/acquaintances/myspace hookups who did that should've known what they were doing, and they wouldn't have broken the damn thing upgrading the RAM. Clearly someone didn't read the manual.... It's not "EVIL EVIL EVIL" Apple. Apple's evil in so many other ways... but this ain't it.
I had a thinkpad that was of the group of "non-user" upgradeable hard drives. If I opened it and put a new one in... even if it was an IBM part, it would've voided my warranty (not that there was much there.) Clearly the laptop was geared towards the "novice" consumer. Meh.. at least it was cheap. ;)
So, instead of the blanket statement you made above about "Apple voids warranties"... you could've ended all this with simply saying _SOME_ apple computers don't let you do this. We know that. We also know that not ALL Apple computers have this policy.
Crucial RAM is Apple RAM. I've got two sticks in my Powermac that, with the exception of the Apple logo sticker, are Crucial ram, right down to the part numbers. So, it depends on the computer.... Apple's not alone in this... and your insinuation of a blanket policy was simply trolling. The Apple rep recommended crucial for quality ram (but I knew that already from my PC days...)