Yes, I know they are out there. That's not what I said. Their whole web site is set up to Buy It! then try it, not try it and then buy it. So show me. What three clicks from their main page?
My opinion below is not exactly on topic for your question, but the end result is that I would recommend Ubuntu. They make a great distro and support it well without being focused on money the way Mandriva has become. And now for the rest of my rant...
--
In my opinion, Mandriva is no longer a viable option for anyone who wishes to try Linux for the first time. It has gone the way of many of the main distros in that they want money before you try. The problem with that of course is that if you decide you don't like the distro, you're still out the cash. Try three or more distros that require payment first and Linux quickly becomes prohibitively expensive for a single user. There is suppose to be a free, limited download of Mandriva available through the Mandriva club (and there is) but good luck finding it on their web site. I finally had to write to their tech support requesting they send me a link to the free "limited" version. Unfortunately for them, by the time they sent me a link to the limited version, I had already installed Ubuntu. Ubuntu works as well as any distro I have tried so far (in fact, better than most) and the Ubuntu community is MUCH less pushy when it comes to financial support.
The bottom line is, with many distros requiring payment up front, Linux is becoming at least as expensive as Windows, if not more so. I personally would not recommend anyone use any Linux distro that requires payment up front, no matter how good it is. If the distro is good, users will support it. If not, they won't. I believe this is what explains how Ubuntu has skyrocketed to the top of the distro popularity list. It is a great distribution and they don't ask for support until after you expect to stick with it. As it should be.
An excellent example of how to get people to accept ads...it's all in the marketing. As you say, give the recipient something they want and they will accept the intrusion of the ad. That's how it works today in all other media, why not games? Would I stand in one spot waiting for an ad to play (and ducking the incoming bullets if need be) if it gave me some valuable credit in the game? Yes.
As you drive your combat skimmer across the sand dunes on Alberon VI, you notice a full motion billboard next to the bombed out ruins of the enemy's headquarters..."Get a free Experian credit report with a free 30-day credit monitoring trial."
Player: "Oops, time out while I take 15 seconds to watch this ad..."
Game Narrator: "As you stand in the same spot for 1.3 seconds, the demon from hell rips your head off and tosses your mangled body over the nearby cliff. Alas, you find yourself dead at the bottom of the ravine. Better luck next time."
AC, the issue is that a third party wants to track users between sites. There's no issue with a webmaster tracking someone within their own site. What are you going to do, coordinate your unique ID across 10,000 webmasters? Good luck with that. (sounds like job security to me)
PS. many of us turn off the forwarding link as well, or supply a randomly generated one hehe...
Absolutely right. However, it seems they still don't get it...
The [Persistent Identification Element (PIE)] technology, which is already being used by UV clients, both restores original cookies and places Macromedia Flash MX files on users' computers that can't be as easily deleted.
As I am sure most of you will agree, people are learning to delete their cookies because most of us don't want to be tracked everywhere we go (in the real world this is called stalking). If the advertizers had policed themselves and did reasonable things with cookies, it wouldn't have become a problem. However, a few bad apples decided to do all sorts of things that any reasonable person would find offensive, and since Windows has a pitiful mechanism for managing cookies (by design I am sure) the quick fix is to simply delete them.
So quit bitching and change your ways, cause we aren't going to take it anymore.
If history is any guide (and it is), before making a comment about "a country based on taking over land from other people" I would challenge you to show me one country that is not guilty of this.
The truth is, the normal method of any expansion in human history has been by force. There were many Native American nations fighting with their neighbors when the colonization of the Americas started (it was not one harmonious group as some anti-American bashers would like you to believe). The American revolution was in part successful (from the US's point of view, of course) because of the conflicts between Spain, England, and France at the time. Europe's history is rampant with conquest attempts century after century. The mid east countries have been constantly fighting over land since time began. China has a history of territorial conquests spanning over 4000 years.
Bottom line...there is no group on this planet that is not guilty of forcefully taking land from another somewhere in their history. The US just happens to be the big boy on the block right now, so they make a convenient scapegoat for every shallow mind that wants to point fingers.
So when are we all going to stop killing one another? When your neighbor's life becomes more important to you than your own? When life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is guaranteed to everyone without reservation? When the right to life is not measured in euros?
And the software now uses machine-learning technology to program the car to "remember" how it's first driven over a course manually, and then emulate those actions for autonomous driving.
First a human drives the course and then the software replays the actions of the human? Yes, the software makes corrections along the way but this defeats the purpose of the competition, i.e. the car autonomously navigating by itself over unknown terrain. Sounds dangerously close to a disqualification to me (if I were a competing team, I'd be sure to at least complain)...
First of all, there's not a lot of privacy in the constitution in the sense we are talking about here (some would argue none at all). Second, I'm not talking about the government getting involved -- it already is -- I'm talking about the citizens getting involved to promote better laws.
One of the fastest growing issues in our digital age is identity theft. The single biggest enabler to this problem is unnecessary personal data stored in insecure business systems. Once biometric based identification is commonplace, unnecessary storage of that data becomes even more of an issue, because once the electronic signature of your thumb print is stolen, it's going to be tough to replace your thumb.
Or maybe you are one of these people who feels like it hasn't happened to you personally so there is no real problem? But then when your personal data is stolen, and you get to shoulder the expense and hassle of cleaning up the mess, then maybe you will have a different attitude about the issue.
Here's hoping you'll get the chance to experience it firsthand.
All of you American citizens out there, listen up. Whether or not Disney is on the up and up about this, there's only one way to fix the problem once and for all. It's time for every good citizen to petition their political representitives for privacy laws that mean something. In my job, I deal with privacy laws from countries around the world. We plan what we have to do to comply with the local laws of each country. When we come to the US, more often than not it's "don't worry about it, the law doesn't mean a thing". Isn't it about time we make it mean something? Get politically active. It's the only way to make a difference. You can bet the RIAA, MPAA, Disney, Microsoft, even fair haired IBM are politically active.
The US used to have a government that was for its citizens. It's about time we had one again.
Infact, I think that in the advent that my content is stolen or damaged, I should be able to goto a distribution point (like the record label's web site) and download another copy of the content completely free, because I have already paid for it.
Sorry to be negative, but it doesn't work that way. You paid for the copy that was stolen or damaged. Remember, copyright is about controling copies. You new download is a new copy, therefore (under current law) you have to pay for the new copy, whether or not it is protected by DRM, unless the original purchase gave you the right to a free replacement in case of loss. And whether you get that right is up to every copyright holder individually (i.e. the current law does not require copyright holders to give you the same rights). The only semi-rights you have to make copies without explicit permission is the fair use rights. And they do not include a free replacement.
And just to be more negative about the whole situation, the ultimate goal of DRM is to make you pay for every use of a copyrighted work. Get ready for it, cause that is what "they" are working towards.
However, SCO said in a statement this afternoon, "it would simply be inaccurate - and misleading -- to use Mr Davidson's e-mail to suggest that SCO's internal investigation revealed no problems."
Problem number 1: Linux doesn't contain any of SCO's intellectual property.
When you have the same failure with two different pieces of equipment it becomes much more likely that the failure is being caused by something they have in common...in this case the orbiter itself may be the real source of the problem. Ya never know:)
The obvious argument here for those who support storing old web pages is that archiving web pages falls under fair use in that the act of archiving is a public service, the material is provided by the copyright holder publicly and free of charge, and they haven't said not to archive up until now.
On the other hand, there have been many past discussions about copies of copyrighted content in a transitory state (for example, the temporary cache of web content on your personal computer) arguing that regardless of it's temporary status, it is still a copy and therefore the copyright holder has the right to control that copy (including for example charge you for every copy if they can figure out how to collect -- let's see...copy on the server hard disk, copy in the server memory, copy in your computer's memory, copy in the temp folder, copy in the video card RAM -- 5 copies in all). Yes, you and I know how stupid this viewpoint is but the current law is digitally challenged and until some idiot of a company challenges every area where copyright intersects the digital era, the law doesn't know how to respond. Here we get to see how it applies to digital archives not under the control of the copyright holder. Should be informative.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, I know they are out there. That's not what I said. Their whole web site is set up to Buy It! then try it, not try it and then buy it. So show me. What three clicks from their main page?
My opinion below is not exactly on topic for your question, but the end result is that I would recommend Ubuntu. They make a great distro and support it well without being focused on money the way Mandriva has become. And now for the rest of my rant...
--
In my opinion, Mandriva is no longer a viable option for anyone who wishes to try Linux for the first time. It has gone the way of many of the main distros in that they want money before you try. The problem with that of course is that if you decide you don't like the distro, you're still out the cash. Try three or more distros that require payment first and Linux quickly becomes prohibitively expensive for a single user. There is suppose to be a free, limited download of Mandriva available through the Mandriva club (and there is) but good luck finding it on their web site. I finally had to write to their tech support requesting they send me a link to the free "limited" version. Unfortunately for them, by the time they sent me a link to the limited version, I had already installed Ubuntu. Ubuntu works as well as any distro I have tried so far (in fact, better than most) and the Ubuntu community is MUCH less pushy when it comes to financial support.
The bottom line is, with many distros requiring payment up front, Linux is becoming at least as expensive as Windows, if not more so. I personally would not recommend anyone use any Linux distro that requires payment up front, no matter how good it is. If the distro is good, users will support it. If not, they won't. I believe this is what explains how Ubuntu has skyrocketed to the top of the distro popularity list. It is a great distribution and they don't ask for support until after you expect to stick with it. As it should be.
able to record every show on every channel being recorded in the UK for an entire month
Yeah but that's only three shows, right?
An excellent example of how to get people to accept ads...it's all in the marketing. As you say, give the recipient something they want and they will accept the intrusion of the ad. That's how it works today in all other media, why not games? Would I stand in one spot waiting for an ad to play (and ducking the incoming bullets if need be) if it gave me some valuable credit in the game? Yes.
Spot where game ads play are automatically safe zones for the first 15 seconds of the first viewing...
As you drive your combat skimmer across the sand dunes on Alberon VI, you notice a full motion billboard next to the bombed out ruins of the enemy's headquarters..."Get a free Experian credit report with a free 30-day credit monitoring trial."
Player: "Oops, time out while I take 15 seconds to watch this ad..."
Game Narrator: "As you stand in the same spot for 1.3 seconds, the demon from hell rips your head off and tosses your mangled body over the nearby cliff. Alas, you find yourself dead at the bottom of the ravine. Better luck next time."
Interesting...need to correlate this score with zombied computers...see how it stacks up...
Might explain part of why it's difficult to get up and running.
Anyone make a MUMPS automatic translator to a better language?
OK, here's some flamebait.
An open souce project that provides great value and fills a really important need that is hard to install and maintain.
Where have I heard that before?
Why is it so many AC's are idiots?
AC, the issue is that a third party wants to track users between sites. There's no issue with a webmaster tracking someone within their own site. What are you going to do, coordinate your unique ID across 10,000 webmasters? Good luck with that. (sounds like job security to me)
PS. many of us turn off the forwarding link as well, or supply a randomly generated one hehe...
Absolutely right. However, it seems they still don't get it...
The [Persistent Identification Element (PIE)] technology, which is already being used by UV clients, both restores original cookies and places Macromedia Flash MX files on users' computers that can't be as easily deleted.
The war continues...
As I am sure most of you will agree, people are learning to delete their cookies because most of us don't want to be tracked everywhere we go (in the real world this is called stalking). If the advertizers had policed themselves and did reasonable things with cookies, it wouldn't have become a problem. However, a few bad apples decided to do all sorts of things that any reasonable person would find offensive, and since Windows has a pitiful mechanism for managing cookies (by design I am sure) the quick fix is to simply delete them.
So quit bitching and change your ways, cause we aren't going to take it anymore.
If history is any guide (and it is), before making a comment about "a country based on taking over land from other people" I would challenge you to show me one country that is not guilty of this.
The truth is, the normal method of any expansion in human history has been by force. There were many Native American nations fighting with their neighbors when the colonization of the Americas started (it was not one harmonious group as some anti-American bashers would like you to believe). The American revolution was in part successful (from the US's point of view, of course) because of the conflicts between Spain, England, and France at the time. Europe's history is rampant with conquest attempts century after century. The mid east countries have been constantly fighting over land since time began. China has a history of territorial conquests spanning over 4000 years.
Bottom line...there is no group on this planet that is not guilty of forcefully taking land from another somewhere in their history. The US just happens to be the big boy on the block right now, so they make a convenient scapegoat for every shallow mind that wants to point fingers.
So when are we all going to stop killing one another? When your neighbor's life becomes more important to you than your own? When life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is guaranteed to everyone without reservation? When the right to life is not measured in euros?
Sounds to me like we have a ways to go.
I agree. One thing we need more of is less-than-lethal options. We have enough tools to kill people already.
And the software now uses machine-learning technology to program the car to "remember" how it's first driven over a course manually, and then emulate those actions for autonomous driving.
First a human drives the course and then the software replays the actions of the human? Yes, the software makes corrections along the way but this defeats the purpose of the competition, i.e. the car autonomously navigating by itself over unknown terrain. Sounds dangerously close to a disqualification to me (if I were a competing team, I'd be sure to at least complain)...
Impressive...if each line consists of 1,000,000 characters...
First of all, there's not a lot of privacy in the constitution in the sense we are talking about here (some would argue none at all). Second, I'm not talking about the government getting involved -- it already is -- I'm talking about the citizens getting involved to promote better laws.
One of the fastest growing issues in our digital age is identity theft. The single biggest enabler to this problem is unnecessary personal data stored in insecure business systems. Once biometric based identification is commonplace, unnecessary storage of that data becomes even more of an issue, because once the electronic signature of your thumb print is stolen, it's going to be tough to replace your thumb.
Or maybe you are one of these people who feels like it hasn't happened to you personally so there is no real problem? But then when your personal data is stolen, and you get to shoulder the expense and hassle of cleaning up the mess, then maybe you will have a different attitude about the issue.
Here's hoping you'll get the chance to experience it firsthand.
All of you American citizens out there, listen up. Whether or not Disney is on the up and up about this, there's only one way to fix the problem once and for all. It's time for every good citizen to petition their political representitives for privacy laws that mean something. In my job, I deal with privacy laws from countries around the world. We plan what we have to do to comply with the local laws of each country. When we come to the US, more often than not it's "don't worry about it, the law doesn't mean a thing". Isn't it about time we make it mean something? Get politically active. It's the only way to make a difference. You can bet the RIAA, MPAA, Disney, Microsoft, even fair haired IBM are politically active.
The US used to have a government that was for its citizens. It's about time we had one again.
Infact, I think that in the advent that my content is stolen or damaged, I should be able to goto a distribution point (like the record label's web site) and download another copy of the content completely free, because I have already paid for it.
Sorry to be negative, but it doesn't work that way. You paid for the copy that was stolen or damaged. Remember, copyright is about controling copies. You new download is a new copy, therefore (under current law) you have to pay for the new copy, whether or not it is protected by DRM, unless the original purchase gave you the right to a free replacement in case of loss. And whether you get that right is up to every copyright holder individually (i.e. the current law does not require copyright holders to give you the same rights). The only semi-rights you have to make copies without explicit permission is the fair use rights. And they do not include a free replacement.
And just to be more negative about the whole situation, the ultimate goal of DRM is to make you pay for every use of a copyrighted work. Get ready for it, cause that is what "they" are working towards.
However, SCO said in a statement this afternoon, "it would simply be inaccurate - and misleading -- to use Mr Davidson's e-mail to suggest that SCO's internal investigation revealed no problems."
Problem number 1: Linux doesn't contain any of SCO's intellectual property.
Everything out of SCO has been inaccurate up to this point...
On the other hand...
:)
When you have the same failure with two different pieces of equipment it becomes much more likely that the failure is being caused by something they have in common...in this case the orbiter itself may be the real source of the problem. Ya never know
The obvious argument here for those who support storing old web pages is that archiving web pages falls under fair use in that the act of archiving is a public service, the material is provided by the copyright holder publicly and free of charge, and they haven't said not to archive up until now.
On the other hand, there have been many past discussions about copies of copyrighted content in a transitory state (for example, the temporary cache of web content on your personal computer) arguing that regardless of it's temporary status, it is still a copy and therefore the copyright holder has the right to control that copy (including for example charge you for every copy if they can figure out how to collect -- let's see...copy on the server hard disk, copy in the server memory, copy in your computer's memory, copy in the temp folder, copy in the video card RAM -- 5 copies in all). Yes, you and I know how stupid this viewpoint is but the current law is digitally challenged and until some idiot of a company challenges every area where copyright intersects the digital era, the law doesn't know how to respond. Here we get to see how it applies to digital archives not under the control of the copyright holder. Should be informative.
It's a sad state of affairs when a fourth generation release of probably the best supported Linux distro available can only gain a 6 out of 10 rating.