You obviously never went to the same university as I did;)
Seriously though, true enough that could work but sadly due to the quite serious (and shocking) shortfall in computers in the labs (and library as it happens), you would be very unlikely to find groups of spare machines unless you got in very early in the morning. (This changed when the labs went 24 hours). This in turn would make people - and the lob monitors - much less forgiving when they found someone intentionally bucking the system.
I always had my laptop with me so it was never a problem for me and - being of a slightly evil disposition - there was a certain amusement to be had in observing this unceasing battle for machines from afar.
My thinking is the same as the thread starter's - giving out passwords seems like such alien behavior to me that I think I just couldn't do it. I'd feel sick to the stomach if I did.
For things that don't matter much to me ('throwaway' accounts) I have a common 'throwaway' password but this still doesn't mean I would intentionally and voluntarily give that password up to anyone. (Paranoid? Maybe, but I can rest easily).
I have had people ask if they can borrow my laptop to check their email or read the NY Times Online or whatever and I never have my passwords remembered by the computer for that reason. I most definitely wouldn't allow someone else to use my credentials - even if I consider it a 'throwaway' login. They supply their own or not at all.
The problems arise when people don't assign a good password (my Mom's cell phone pass really was 1234!) and/or don't assign enough importance to their information. (If I had a Myface or Spacebook or whatever-it's-called account, would I really want people potentially messing around with the details? Probably not).
I recall fellow students at university would often leave their machines logged in and unattended, often also leaving online accounts logged in[0]. Other non-scrupulous students would always descend and make lots of changes and leave their machine with lots of IE windows open with gay porn sites open. The user would return and have the non-envious job of closing all those windows (popups OnClose were very frequent back then) AND then have to meticulously check the details in their various profiles for any errant changes. Even after this many just didn't learn and it was all treated as a 'bit of a joke'.
[0] Due to the rush to get a computer from the limited stock they would often go to class and forget to lock it. Others didn't lock it anyway because a uni BOFH would often do his reboot-the-locked-machines rounds[1] so it was in their interest (or so they thought) to make the computer look like it was in use and that they had just gone out for a brief moment.
[1] Even if the evil uni dude missed it other students would have no qualms about simply unplugging the thing.
Oh and hey great apartment by the way! Loving the decor.
I would think that it is preferable to try and nip it in the bud, if at all possible, rather than fight them in court after the fact.
The idealist in me says there would be an public outcry but the realist in me tells me that they would dress it up nicely and fool people into accepting, nay wanting, it.
Also if it were to be fought in court my worry would be that you just don't know which way a court is going to rule; common sense doesn't seem to be very common these days. (This is not to say it wouldn't be worth fighting of course and I verily hope it would be so opposed - "those who would trade in their freedom for their protection deserve neither").
wonder what happens to the quality of music the labels offer when their incentive to produce quality work - profit - is removed.
I think that incentive is not actually fully functioning right now;)
I don't buy CDs anymore because I don't perceive the quality to be high enough to justify the exorbitant costs. Can the quality seriously drop any further?
What's more, I don't download their chintzy wares either. The only stuff I listen to is available directly from the bands online (Harvey Danger, Lemon Demon, from 'artist showcase' sites etc.) and I will always purchase the physical CDs where possible in appreciation of if they don't do CDs I will try to send them cash/a donation (which I actually prefer over adding clutter to my house).
The same goes for DVDs - my last purchase was years ago - but that's another story.
I feel 'purified' having made these decisions not to be beholden to some faceless conglomerate intent on bagging my hard-earned cash for little in return.
As it happens, this weekend I had occasion to browse a music store. I saw two items that I thought might be interesting, but had no strong enough compulsion to purchase them. I walked out of the store and guess what, I was really pleased that I hadn't succumbed to the temptation; it was a fantastic feeling precisely because I didn't - and don't - feel that I missed out.
The levy ('protection money' by another name) Griffin suggests here made me think his given name may have been Peter. Unless it is an opt-in deal (which I can't see them championing but notice that the TFA says Griffin is "quick to stress that he isn't in favor of a compulsory... blanket license") it would directly affect people like me who have no need nor want of their goods. I have no desire to have my internet access snipped because I refuse to pay a fee some fat cat execs think they somehow have the right to.
As mentioned elsewhere, it looks like yet another gasping attempt at prolonging the life of a dying business model. They want to keep their hand in and fend off the possible 'horrific' future of artists being paid directly.
I can see many people thinking that, especially youngsters who have grown up with it.
From my point of view I get sick of copy protection. I have never downloaded a cracked copy of a game I don't own. I have many games on the shelf that have never been inserted into the machine. I prefer to create CD images to mount and run from hard disk because the sound of the CD drive (albeit getting on in years) whirring up and down is very annoying. And I don't have to worry about damaging the original CD.
I use the CD key that is provided inside the case but that's all.
I understand their arguments for the inclusion of copy protection and agree to some extent, but it doesn't take away from the fact that it makes playing a pain for me as a paying customer.
Some would say that by buying the games I'm supporting the use of copy protection but the truth is I don't buy anywhere near as many games as I once did, and I now earn more than I did back then. (I haven't purchased a new game for about a year). It has just become too inconvenient for me (in all respects). [But you can't win: they will only put fewer sales down to a increase in 'piracy'].
As for the demo argument (mentioned elsewhere in this thread), I can see that being an issue as demos themselves are generally overly-restricted. Only x minutes play or whatever.
I have only ever bought one game based on impressions from the demo alone and that is because it provided a plentiful amount of game play for me to play through. I was pleased that the final game was perfectly represented by the demo.
I think the solution for solving both these issues is to find some model where there is more openness. Someone else mentioned higher up the thread that they could include copy protection that prevents progressing beyond a point later in the game. If done well I could see that working - if nothing else, it's something for game companies to think about.
As for demos, they need to be much more than a video trailer or a couple of scenes or a single objective IMHO. The demo I mentioned above actually approached having too much content (I was surprised when section after section was opened for play while all the time I was thinking "surely this one is going to be locked") but this is preferably to having too little.
The key is not to treat customers like criminals (music and film execs listen up too!). That is not to say that a solution will be easy and all this is just my opinion as a user but that's the way I see it.
the Harper court rejected that contention, holding that 'a question remains as to whether Defendant knew the warnings on compact discs were applicable in this KaZaA setting,' since 'In this case, there were no compact discs with warnings.'
Mr. Riaa said, "You were quite entitled to make any admissions of guilt at the appropriate time, you know." "Appropriate time?" hooted Ms. Harper. "Appropriate time? The first I knew about it was when a lackey arrived at my home yesterday. I asked him if he'd come to clean the windows and he said no, he'd come to demolish my life. He didn't tell me straight away of course. Oh no. First he wiped a couple of windows and charged me a fiver. Then he told me." "But Ms. Harper, the copyright label has been available on a CD in your local music store for the last several years." "Oh yes, well, as soon as I heard I went straight round to see it, yesterday afternoon. You hadn't exactly gone out of your way to call attention to them, had you? I mean, like actually telling anybody or anything." "But the label was on display..." "On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find it." "That's the display department." "With a flashlight." "Ah, well, the lights had probably gone." "So had the stairs." "But look, you found the label, didn't you?" "Yes," said Arthur, "yes I did. It was on display on the bottom of a CD case in a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'Beware of the Leopard.'"
Part of me wants to think this a troll but there is a sadly an underlying insightfulness to it.
Publishers don't like risk so for something with a new and innovative enough concept will need to prove itself first. IMHO the only thing to do then is polish that "rough as nails" prototype into something playable, release it on the web (free with a Donate button?) for maximum distribution and if people hook onto it then publishers/development studios may sit up, take notice and provide - for something in return - resources for improving the game for a truly spectacular sequel.
- Deploy a network (you get a router, switch and an bunch of computers/printers and unconnected wires. (netwalk in real life) - Move a system or a network to another location (includes packing up and setup, could be part of a tech-biathlon or pentathlon.
- Checking parentheses and fixing unmatched ones correctly. (Preferably in Lisp code).;)
George puts his elite legal skills to good use in the recently announced Broken Sword 5.
It is rumored that he will use a clown's red nose and theatrical grease paint in a comedic fashion, in one of the most hilarious courtroom scenes you will ever see.
Do all of you who rail against the RIAA really want them defeated because they hired crappy lawyers, or do you want them defeated on the merits?
Either.
Ideally yes it would be on merit. Unfortunately the courts have been known to do dumb things in the past and if we can't beat them on merit I'd still like to have the option of beating them because they've got crappy lawyers.
Hell, failing that I'd still like the option of a janken match.
I see your point and I raise you an: In fairness it is only logical to have a healthy skepticism when it comes to Microsoft. It's natural to think there is some obscure and very evil business reason behind it.
If they are embracing open source in a way that doesn't lead onto an extend phase then good, more power to them. (On second thoughts good but without the more power thing:) ).
Slashdot Mirror
A common typo. The keys are like right next to each other.
</oblig>
Tried to post this about 20 times last night but was very drunk.
Best opening line of any Slashdot post. Ever. Congratulations.
That is all.
You obviously never went to the same university as I did ;)
Seriously though, true enough that could work but sadly due to the quite serious (and shocking) shortfall in computers in the labs (and library as it happens), you would be very unlikely to find groups of spare machines unless you got in very early in the morning. (This changed when the labs went 24 hours). This in turn would make people - and the lob monitors - much less forgiving when they found someone intentionally bucking the system.
I always had my laptop with me so it was never a problem for me and - being of a slightly evil disposition - there was a certain amusement to be had in observing this unceasing battle for machines from afar.
One guy did try that but that will only hold off a geek who enjoys fixing things for so long :)
I agree.
My thinking is the same as the thread starter's - giving out passwords seems like such alien behavior to me that I think I just couldn't do it. I'd feel sick to the stomach if I did.
For things that don't matter much to me ('throwaway' accounts) I have a common 'throwaway' password but this still doesn't mean I would intentionally and voluntarily give that password up to anyone. (Paranoid? Maybe, but I can rest easily).
I have had people ask if they can borrow my laptop to check their email or read the NY Times Online or whatever and I never have my passwords remembered by the computer for that reason. I most definitely wouldn't allow someone else to use my credentials - even if I consider it a 'throwaway' login. They supply their own or not at all.
The problems arise when people don't assign a good password (my Mom's cell phone pass really was 1234!) and/or don't assign enough importance to their information. (If I had a Myface or Spacebook or whatever-it's-called account, would I really want people potentially messing around with the details? Probably not).
I recall fellow students at university would often leave their machines logged in and unattended, often also leaving online accounts logged in[0]. Other non-scrupulous students would always descend and make lots of changes and leave their machine with lots of IE windows open with gay porn sites open. The user would return and have the non-envious job of closing all those windows (popups OnClose were very frequent back then) AND then have to meticulously check the details in their various profiles for any errant changes. Even after this many just didn't learn and it was all treated as a 'bit of a joke'.
[0] Due to the rush to get a computer from the limited stock they would often go to class and forget to lock it. Others didn't lock it anyway because a uni BOFH would often do his reboot-the-locked-machines rounds[1] so it was in their interest (or so they thought) to make the computer look like it was in use and that they had just gone out for a brief moment.
[1] Even if the evil uni dude missed it other students would have no qualms about simply unplugging the thing.
Oh and hey great apartment by the way! Loving the decor.
I'm the same (more here).
I would think that it is preferable to try and nip it in the bud, if at all possible, rather than fight them in court after the fact.
The idealist in me says there would be an public outcry but the realist in me tells me that they would dress it up nicely and fool people into accepting, nay wanting, it.
Also if it were to be fought in court my worry would be that you just don't know which way a court is going to rule; common sense doesn't seem to be very common these days. (This is not to say it wouldn't be worth fighting of course and I verily hope it would be so opposed - "those who would trade in their freedom for their protection deserve neither").
wonder what happens to the quality of music the labels offer when their incentive to produce quality work - profit - is removed.
I think that incentive is not actually fully functioning right now ;)
I don't buy CDs anymore because I don't perceive the quality to be high enough to justify the exorbitant costs. Can the quality seriously drop any further?
What's more, I don't download their chintzy wares either. The only stuff I listen to is available directly from the bands online (Harvey Danger, Lemon Demon, from 'artist showcase' sites etc.) and I will always purchase the physical CDs where possible in appreciation of if they don't do CDs I will try to send them cash/a donation (which I actually prefer over adding clutter to my house).
The same goes for DVDs - my last purchase was years ago - but that's another story.
I feel 'purified' having made these decisions not to be beholden to some faceless conglomerate intent on bagging my hard-earned cash for little in return.
As it happens, this weekend I had occasion to browse a music store. I saw two items that I thought might be interesting, but had no strong enough compulsion to purchase them. I walked out of the store and guess what, I was really pleased that I hadn't succumbed to the temptation; it was a fantastic feeling precisely because I didn't - and don't - feel that I missed out.
The levy ('protection money' by another name) Griffin suggests here made me think his given name may have been Peter. Unless it is an opt-in deal (which I can't see them championing but notice that the TFA says Griffin is "quick to stress that he isn't in favor of a compulsory... blanket license") it would directly affect people like me who have no need nor want of their goods. I have no desire to have my internet access snipped because I refuse to pay a fee some fat cat execs think they somehow have the right to.
As mentioned elsewhere, it looks like yet another gasping attempt at prolonging the life of a dying business model. They want to keep their hand in and fend off the possible 'horrific' future of artists being paid directly.
That means the game is done -- it is now in the hands of Microsoft.
Therein lies the rub.
Yes, but there's always some guy with a towel who was out that day and now needs access to that data and no-one is left to help.
Worst. Case. Scenario.
Ever.
I can see many people thinking that, especially youngsters who have grown up with it.
From my point of view I get sick of copy protection. I have never downloaded a cracked copy of a game I don't own. I have many games on the shelf that have never been inserted into the machine. I prefer to create CD images to mount and run from hard disk because the sound of the CD drive (albeit getting on in years) whirring up and down is very annoying. And I don't have to worry about damaging the original CD.
I use the CD key that is provided inside the case but that's all.
I understand their arguments for the inclusion of copy protection and agree to some extent, but it doesn't take away from the fact that it makes playing a pain for me as a paying customer.
Some would say that by buying the games I'm supporting the use of copy protection but the truth is I don't buy anywhere near as many games as I once did, and I now earn more than I did back then. (I haven't purchased a new game for about a year). It has just become too inconvenient for me (in all respects). [But you can't win: they will only put fewer sales down to a increase in 'piracy'].
As for the demo argument (mentioned elsewhere in this thread), I can see that being an issue as demos themselves are generally overly-restricted. Only x minutes play or whatever.
I have only ever bought one game based on impressions from the demo alone and that is because it provided a plentiful amount of game play for me to play through. I was pleased that the final game was perfectly represented by the demo.
I think the solution for solving both these issues is to find some model where there is more openness. Someone else mentioned higher up the thread that they could include copy protection that prevents progressing beyond a point later in the game. If done well I could see that working - if nothing else, it's something for game companies to think about.
As for demos, they need to be much more than a video trailer or a couple of scenes or a single objective IMHO. The demo I mentioned above actually approached having too much content (I was surprised when section after section was opened for play while all the time I was thinking "surely this one is going to be locked") but this is preferably to having too little.
The key is not to treat customers like criminals (music and film execs listen up too!). That is not to say that a solution will be easy and all this is just my opinion as a user but that's the way I see it.
"All yarrrr base arrrr belong to us!"
I know, I know. I've gone too farrrr! (Dammit!)
Well they were planning to push all the non-believers over the edge but they're still trying to locate it.
That's nothing. Tell 'em about the twinkie.
s/Arthur/Harper - there is always one...
the Harper court rejected that contention, holding that 'a question remains as to whether Defendant knew the warnings on compact discs were applicable in this KaZaA setting,' since 'In this case, there were no compact discs with warnings.'
Mr. Riaa said, "You were quite entitled to make any admissions of guilt at the appropriate time, you know."
"Appropriate time?" hooted Ms. Harper. "Appropriate time? The first I knew about it was when a lackey arrived at my home yesterday. I asked him if he'd come to clean the windows and he said no, he'd come to demolish my life. He didn't tell me straight away of course. Oh no. First he wiped a couple of windows and charged me a fiver. Then he told me."
"But Ms. Harper, the copyright label has been available on a CD in your local music store for the last several years."
"Oh yes, well, as soon as I heard I went straight round to see it, yesterday afternoon. You hadn't exactly gone out of your way to call attention to them, had you? I mean, like actually telling anybody or anything."
"But the label was on display..."
"On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find it."
"That's the display department."
"With a flashlight."
"Ah, well, the lights had probably gone."
"So had the stairs."
"But look, you found the label, didn't you?"
"Yes," said Arthur, "yes I did. It was on display on the bottom of a CD case in a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'Beware of the Leopard.'"
Part of me wants to think this a troll but there is a sadly an underlying insightfulness to it.
Publishers don't like risk so for something with a new and innovative enough concept will need to prove itself first. IMHO the only thing to do then is polish that "rough as nails" prototype into something playable, release it on the web (free with a Donate button?) for maximum distribution and if people hook onto it then publishers/development studios may sit up, take notice and provide - for something in return - resources for improving the game for a truly spectacular sequel.
Only guaranteed to be a hit if the vampirates are surfboarding killer bikini vampirate girls.
Otherwise fuhgeddaboutit!
Ah the sudden twist. Well done, Sir. I was sure it was going to be something else.
That is unless 'popping zits' is a euphemism for doing away with competitors infringing on your patch.
- Deploy a network (you get a router, switch and an bunch of computers/printers and unconnected wires. (netwalk in real life)
- Move a system or a network to another location (includes packing up and setup, could be part of a tech-biathlon or pentathlon.
- Checking parentheses and fixing unmatched ones correctly. (Preferably in Lisp code). ;)
George puts his elite legal skills to good use in the recently announced Broken Sword 5.
It is rumored that he will use a clown's red nose and theatrical grease paint in a comedic fashion, in one of the most hilarious courtroom scenes you will ever see.
Nevermind, I'm sure he'll get himself back on his feet someday ;)
That was my first thought too.
Geez, for that price, it sure as heck better come with 'free' compact discs containing the consummate Queen back catalog or something.
Do all of you who rail against the RIAA really want them defeated because they hired crappy lawyers, or do you want them defeated on the merits?
Either.
Ideally yes it would be on merit. Unfortunately the courts have been known to do dumb things in the past and if we can't beat them on merit I'd still like to have the option of beating them because they've got crappy lawyers.
Hell, failing that I'd still like the option of a janken match.
Ergo Microsoft are going to add a GUI to the Apache server backend and release as Patchy Windows[0].
It's true, my magic 8 ball said "you may rely on it", what more do you need?
[0] to shamelessly reuse a joke from another post.
I see your point and I raise you an: In fairness it is only logical to have a healthy skepticism when it comes to Microsoft. It's natural to think there is some obscure and very evil business reason behind it.
If they are embracing open source in a way that doesn't lead onto an extend phase then good, more power to them. (On second thoughts good but without the more power thing :) ).