That is, until the gamer finds out he can buy it for half the retail price...
Yeah. I love my games, and I try to keep them all pristine, but if someone offered me a DS lite for $50, the lack of a serial code wouldn't bother me* at all. Especially since the serial code is probably on a sticker, and could come of quite cleanly.
*I would, however, be bothered by stealing from Nintendo. *crazy fangirl*
In America, where I'm pretty sure he signed it, the responsibility is on you, not anyone else, to make sure you understand your contract. Unless he is mentally handicapped and they were clearly taking advantage of him (which is not the case for him) then he had every opportunity to keep asking them until they explained, or hire a lawyer to explain it to him.
He makes more money than most people ever will, I don't feel bad for him because he's too dumb to make shitloads more.
What do you think the puffer and the swiping the laptop are? They are the modern day body-cavity.
Oh my God, you think that standing in the puffer machine for a minute and having someone check to see if your laptop is a bomb are anywhere comparable to having complete strangers remove your clothes and search inside you? Go get a reality check, dude.
It didn't give us the option of internet. Maybe it didn't detect our wireless settings without being logged in? I don't know. Anyways, even with the phone call it wasn't much of a hassle. Still, it's the principle of the thing. I like having the freedom to do whatever I want with my computers, without asking Microsoft or anyone else for permission. Which is why I use Linux (except for my husband's computer).
Hows he going to plug in the Wii? Does he know you can get SCART multi-ins to allow more than the 2 devices he has plugged in?
They sell them at pretty much everywhere you'll be able to buy a Wii. If Joe Shmoe knows enough about setting up game systems to know that there's plugs behind his TV and is able to check if one's free, then he'll probably be able to wonder if, like for electric plugs and phone outlets, someone has created a splitter for his TV to plug multiple things into his TV, and then ask someone.
Maybe not. But then, even if the Wii does have DVD playback, is Joe Shmoe just going to throw out his DVD player? Non-technical people don't deal well with technical changes, so is Joe Shmoe going to be happy trying to figure out which button on his Wiimote is the 'Play' button? I think Joe Shmoe would want to find a multi-in even if the Wii does play DVDs.
Also: how much room do you think is left under/above/to the side of the average tv after all your boxen are installled? Again, non-technical people (and I speak from real experience here as I'm married to one) dont relish the prospect of another box to join the 7 or 8 that are there already.
Ok, so you go from Joe Smhoe can't get more than two things hooked up to his TV to Joe Shmoe doesn't want 9 things hooked up to his TV? Also, where do you get 7 or 8 boxen hooked up to the average TV? Sat/Cable, DVD, maybe VCR... uh, are you counting the TV? external speakers? other game systems (the Wii can replace your 'cube and old school nintendos!)? Seriously, how do you get 7 or 8 things hooked up to the average TV?
Unfortunately, the reality of the situation is that while you will stop buying them, enough of the market will not and will thus perpetuate the status quo. And as for not liking my suggestion for integrating it less intrusively into the game, well, lets see you do better!
It's not your fault I think your suggestion sucks; I'm pretty sure any advertising in fantasy games would suck because it will break the atmosphere. You made a good go of it though, but where you went wrong was in assuming ads are needed.
Maybe the rest of the world is fine paying $60 and then having ads break up their gameplay. If that happens and I can't buy new games without ads, well, I still haven't beaten Final Fantasy VI. Then there's Persona, Valkyrie Profile, Earthbound, and a slew of other games I missed when they were first out. If I can't find them on Ebay, then that's why they invented roms. Seriously, if it's either pay for advertising or play classic games, I know which one I'll choose.
I also get nervouse when I change hardware (video cards, optical drives, etc.). If I have to re-install XP, will I have to beg Microsoft to let me re-install because it looks like a different computer?
Don't worry, you won't have to wait until you reinstall! As soon as you boot up after you've changed too much hardware a friendly little box will appear letting you know that you have to call Microsoft to reactivate! And, it makes sure you won't forget by preventing you from logging in until you do. Even if you put back the old hardware, it knows you still need a reminder to reactivate so it still gives you the same message. How convenient!
Despite my sarcastic tone, I'm completely serious. My husband and I specifically planned when we replaced his motherboard to be a convenient time for us to call Microsoft. It wasn't that much of a hassle, but I resent having to call MS for permission to use our computer. Oh well, some day I'll convince my husband to switch to Linux and we won't have to worry about that stuff anymore.
Advertising is part of our world and culture and they are coming to video games whether you want them to or not.
Unless we stop buying them. Seriously, why is it acceptable to expect people to pay to watch advertising? Sure, I'll play free games with advertising, like candystand.com games, but I am NOT paying $50 or $60 for the latest RPG just to see "Cournel" the NPC selling "K'ntuckee Fried Gryphon wings". I don't think it's funny, I don't think it's cute; I want my games to be as immersive as possible, not hacked up with stupid puns from advertisers. Either they pay for the game or I do, but I am not spending my money to see my game experience interrupted for some "fantasy" variant of KFC or Coke.
1. DVD player - I believe word is that the DVD player aspects are a "plug in" - I'm assuming something like the original Xbox codec plug in device to enable DVD playback. Personally, I'd just as soon see it just built in - bite the bullet on the cost, Nintendo, and people will go "Hm - $200, and it plays games *and* my DVD movies", instead of "Hm - $200, but I have to spend another $30 to play movies? Eh."
Who's waiting for the Wii to come out to get a DVD player? Who is interested in the Wii is going to have a problem sliding their Wii next to their DVD player? If the Wii does have built in DVD player, who's going to throw out their current DVD player? The only people I know who might have problems fitting the Wii in their entertainment center are lacking space because they have ten other game systems shoved into it and will keep buying game systems even if they have to start hanging them from the ceiling.
Seriously, what is the big deal about DVD playback? Sure, it was cool back when the PS2 came out and no one had a DVD player, but now everyone does. Also, the reason the Wii is going to be so much cheaper than the PS3 and Xbox360 is because they're ignoring everything besides what will make fun games. DVD playback isn't nescessary for fun games. Not to mention, the DVD playback liscensing fees go to Sony (amoung others). Why should Nintendo send money to their competitor so that their product has a feature most won't use? I just don't get it.
I agree with your suggestions. I think if I found a Coke ad in Final Fantasy XII, I'd start beating people with the game box. Yet Top Spin is covered with ads (I don't think my charactor has any clothes without brand logos) yet I love that game. I think the only question those looking to put ads in a game need to ask is "Does the ad fit in the gameworld?". Unless the game is free, then the only question is how annoying are the ads.
You can't play your songs on a linux box bucause LINUX IS *****USELESS AS A DESKTOP***** and NOBODY CARES ABOUT IT. Grow up, get a job, buy a Mac, be happy.
I have a job, and I could easily afford a Mac. However, I don't, because I don't want one. I've used Mac OSX, and it does not fit my style and unlike Linux, I cannot make it fit my style because it completely uncustomizable. I would have to give up all my programs (well, not Firefox) and Mac does not have replacements I'd be happy to use. I'd have to give up my package manager and I'd really hate to go back to trying to find my installers online, waiting for them to download, and installing them, even if I don't have to waste my time with next-next-finish like in Windows. When I want to find a program, I want to do a search and only find programs that are meant for my OS and version (even Google can't do that) and then just click on the programs and have them automatically install without any more effort on my part. Also, if you already know the name of the program, there is just nothing faster than typing apt-get install program. You can even do it in bulk! I don't understand why Mac and Windows haven't made package managers.
I can play my songs just fine in my Linux box, thank you, because I don't buy DRMed crap. To be fair, even if I did buy DRMed crap, I could probably still play it. With Linux, if you put in enough time, you can make it do whatever you want. With Mac and Windows, if you want to do something don't want or didn't intend, give up now because even if you could get it to work it will always be a cheap ass hack that will never work right.
Linux isn't useless as a desktop, in fact, it's the only thing I'd ever use on my desktops. It does everything and more that my friends' Windows and Mac boxes do, except sell me crap I don't want to buy from people who don't want to sell to me. I'm not switching just for that.
A robot that knows its position can tell humans, and can do different things nased on its position. A rock can do neither, so we can easily label robots as more aware.
Of course, I don't think robots are self-aware in the sense of having a conscious personhood, and I think it's pushing things a bit to say that since robots have a basic level of awareness they are self-aware. My cats are more self-aware than any robot we could concievably build at this point in time.
Ok, with the more detailed description I realize the scenerio is a little different than I thought. I didn't realize she was actually trying to be a feral colony manager; your original post made it sound like it was all a sham. However, it sounds like she has no idea what she's doing. Anyone with actual knowledge about managing a feral colony will tell you that you need to neuter them all before even thinking about feeding them; some will even tell you that you shouldn't be feeding them at all. Also, she should not be bringing cats from a shelter to the colony, whether they were there originally or not.
I note that you make no mention of feral cat "managers" providing litter boxes.
That's because feral cats are wildlife and wouldn't use litter boxes. Do you see racoons using litterboxes? Do you yell at people with birdfeeders when you find bird shit on your car?
If you really want to help the situation, don't take the cats to shelters hoping for the off-chance that they'll euthanize it. Research feral colony management and then help her manage it right. Trap and neuter the ones she misses, and talk to her about proper colony maintaince and make sure she knows that bringing cats from shelters and feeding them excessively are bad ideas. That's the best way for you to get the cat population under control. Even if you were allowed with local ordinances and stuff to shoot the cats when you see them, you'll never run out of cats to shoot and you'll still find shit in your garden. I know you think she's crazy, and she doesn't sound very responsible to me, but I think your best bet is to work with her, not against her.
Very obviously, a colony with some neutered cats won't be stable. The cats don't neuter themselves. You won't get every last cat. Even if cats were territorial, they would still migrate eventually.
Occasionally other cats will wander into your colony, but not in nearly the numbers you'd have if you were trying to kill them all. If a habitat is nice for feral cats, then if there aren't already cats there then other cats will wander in and start breeding. If there are already cats there, then they won't stop and start populating it, they'll keep wandering.
If this all worked, then why is the cat colony behind my house growing without bound?
Because, as I told you in my response to your post about it, it is NOT a feral cat colony, managed or otherwise. It's a cat hoarder's house. Big difference.
A feral cat colony is a location where cats who are completely wild and never handled by humans gather (they are usually the descendents of former housepets abandoned outside). A managed feral cat colony is where a human comes in and traps, neuters, and marks every cat and watches the colony for non-neutered cats wandering in. Depending on the person's resources and the natural resources of the area, the person may or may not feed the cats, build shelters for them, or provide veterinary care. Feral cats are not pets, they are wild animals living in the wild, and the manager is not their owner, the manager is a person who prevents the colony from growing unbounded and spreading disease and destroying property.
A cat hoarder's house is very different. A cat hoarder starts out as a pet owner, but aquires too many pets to take care of. Their house and property become unliveable as the cat population grows unbounded. The cats are not feral; while, like ferals, they may become unable to be handled from lack of attention (there's only so many cats a single cat lady can handle), however, they are completely unable to care for themselves like ferals can. A feral colony will not stink, nor will there be shit laying around for toddlers to find. Cats are very clean animals and ferals will bury their shit (they don't want to smell it either!) but cats of a cat hoarder aren't able to because they are so overpopulated and so dependant on her (very rarely is it him).
It doesn't matter if your neighbor says it is a feral colony; from your description it is clearly not. A person with more cats than they can handle that are freely breeding and leaving shit around is a cat hoarder and is mentally ill and a danger to themselves and others. Please, call your police or animal control officer and stop your neighbor. I have dealt with cat hoarders and it is always a tragically sad situation that must result in the hoarder being seperated from all animals permanently. Please do not confuse your neighbor for legimate animal welfare workers (like feral cat colony managers) because, no matter what she says her intentions are, she is only hurting the animals. Maybe I'm sounding like I'm assuming too much, but if your description of her is accurate then I am not.
Notice how we always have deer overpopulation problems? Hunters keep shooting them, but then they just mate and make more.
I know it seems counterintuitve. Why should it matter if you kill an animal or neuter it, either way, it won't reproduce? But it does. If you talk to people who've done trap-and-euthanize, you'll find that they just kieep finding more and more cats; their work is never done (just like deer). Whereas with trap-and-neuter, you do the initial neutering, and then you're done; the colony gets stable rather quickly. I know this sounds counterintuitive, but do some research and you'll find that this is how it works.
Burn it to CD, and re-rip it as MP3. iTunes lets you do that.
First I'd have to get it. iTunes doesn't run on my computer, remember?
I'm not saying they should be a charity. I'm saying I am not their customer because they refuse to sell to me. They could easily sell to me if they got rid of their DRM and allowed me to pay for and download their songs from a website, but they're afaid I might then, which I'm perfectly able to do anyways. DRM is dumb.
That's not a feral cat coloney. The lady behind you is a "cat hoarder", and it's not a hobby. It's a mental illness that is a serious danger to the cats, to her, and to you and the rest of her neighbors. You need to call the police on her and get her to stop (cat hoarding violates many animal cruelty laws, as well as many local ordinances on property maintaince and other things), if for no other reason than to prevent your toddlers from playing with cat shit. Yes, the cats will likely be euthanized, and even though I'm usually against euthanization I can tell you without a doubt and with all the love in my heart for cats that euthanization is better for a cat than living with a cat hoarder. Seriously, you have to stop her. Don't just deal with your toddlers picking up shit, call the police.
When you kill a bunch of feral cats, the other feral cats, now that the other cats don't have to fight for food, they breed more and create even more cats than there were before. Most species of animals will instictively mate more when they see their species is getting underpopulated, so if you kill a bunch (and there's really no way to kill them all at once), they'll just make more and more so you'll never be able to stop. However, when the trap-and-neuter method, the insticts to mate to prevent extinction never kick in so you don't have cats mating excessively while you're trying to find them all.
Huh? Why would the car, or a digital song, evaporate when copied?
I guess there's DRM that could do that, but that's just a reason to be against DRM.
If copying cars worked like copying (nonDRM) music, then I wouldn't give a damn if you copied my car. The problem with stealing is that the original owner can no longer enjoy what they owned; if you steal my car, I can't drive to work. Copyright infringement is obviously different from that, because if you copy all my music, I don't care because I can still enjoy it. Copyright infringement is bad in a different way; it means that an artist might became really popular yet not get any money for his/her hard work that everyone enjoys. However, that's not a given. iTunes has been a huge success, even though the music doesn't play on non-iPods and the same music is available nonDRMed for *free* at any pirate site. I think the **AAs (not that they care what I think) should just concentrate getting out good products at reasonable sites, instead of sueing their customers, and then I don't think piracy would be a problem for them.
Yeah, I thought someone would call me out on my pro-stealing everything attitude... Oh wait, I DIDN'T advocate stealing anything.
My issues with iTunes DRM is because I cannot buy music from iTunes and play it on my computer, which runs Linux. Sure, I could run it with wine, but appearently Apple likes to try to break wine compatibility in iTunes patches. Sorry, I feel that DRM that could randomly make all my paid for music *unplayable* because some company decides they don't like my software isn't reasonable.
In fact, that's my issue with all DRM. I don't want some company deciding that they don't want me playing my legitimatly bought, non-copied music, videos, etc. And if I have to *brake* that DRM to play my legitimatly bought stuff (for instance, when I use deCSS to watch my DVDs on my computer) I *really* don't like that being illegal. Also, we don't have to look too far to see that DRM that *really sucks* is already here, no slippery slope required. Look at Sony's rootkits. Look at Starforce's crap. Oh, Sony had to give away free cds to those it rootkited. So sad for Sony.
If you sell a reasonably priced, quality product, then I believe most people will buy it instead of pirate, and the people who would still pirate (not that I condone it) probably wouldn't have given you money no matter what you did. If you sell products crippled by DRM, then you're going to annoy your customers and then they'll turn to the pirates to get your product hassle-free. Of course, the big companies ignore this, but there's always creative commons and indys to get our stuff through when the big companies are being idiots.
There's a large difference in development between a embryo at 6 weeks and a fetus at 2.5 months. The line between embryo and fetus is at about 8 weeks, and there's a reason for that.
I don't know how I would have felt if I miscarried at 2.5 months instead of when I did. Maybe I would have cried like you did. I don't know. When I miscarried though, there wasn't anything for me to look at and say "That could have been my child". There was a lot of blood and tissue, but most of the tissue was probably not even the embryo, just the other stuff that builds up for pregnancy. There was just really nothing for me to cry over. I'm sorry for your loss, and I'm sorry if my story makes you mad, but our situations were rather different, and I was talking about very early miscarriages, not later ones like you and your wife went through.
Slashdot Mirror
*I would, however, be bothered by stealing from Nintendo. *crazy fangirl*
In America, where I'm pretty sure he signed it, the responsibility is on you, not anyone else, to make sure you understand your contract. Unless he is mentally handicapped and they were clearly taking advantage of him (which is not the case for him) then he had every opportunity to keep asking them until they explained, or hire a lawyer to explain it to him.
He makes more money than most people ever will, I don't feel bad for him because he's too dumb to make shitloads more.
It didn't give us the option of internet. Maybe it didn't detect our wireless settings without being logged in? I don't know. Anyways, even with the phone call it wasn't much of a hassle. Still, it's the principle of the thing. I like having the freedom to do whatever I want with my computers, without asking Microsoft or anyone else for permission. Which is why I use Linux (except for my husband's computer).
Maybe not. But then, even if the Wii does have DVD playback, is Joe Shmoe just going to throw out his DVD player? Non-technical people don't deal well with technical changes, so is Joe Shmoe going to be happy trying to figure out which button on his Wiimote is the 'Play' button? I think Joe Shmoe would want to find a multi-in even if the Wii does play DVDs.
Ok, so you go from Joe Smhoe can't get more than two things hooked up to his TV to Joe Shmoe doesn't want 9 things hooked up to his TV? Also, where do you get 7 or 8 boxen hooked up to the average TV? Sat/Cable, DVD, maybe VCR... uh, are you counting the TV? external speakers? other game systems (the Wii can replace your 'cube and old school nintendos!)? Seriously, how do you get 7 or 8 things hooked up to the average TV?
I'm bored too. I'll speak in ascii art if you'll talk to me.
./\_/\
/ o o \____
\ =ø= ____~\
(m_m_(______)
Meow? ^_^
Yeah, I make terrible ascii art. Oh well.
Maybe the rest of the world is fine paying $60 and then having ads break up their gameplay. If that happens and I can't buy new games without ads, well, I still haven't beaten Final Fantasy VI. Then there's Persona, Valkyrie Profile, Earthbound, and a slew of other games I missed when they were first out. If I can't find them on Ebay, then that's why they invented roms. Seriously, if it's either pay for advertising or play classic games, I know which one I'll choose.
I say it looks like bukake.
Why are you debating with an anonymous coward who speaks in ascii art anyways?
Despite my sarcastic tone, I'm completely serious. My husband and I specifically planned when we replaced his motherboard to be a convenient time for us to call Microsoft. It wasn't that much of a hassle, but I resent having to call MS for permission to use our computer. Oh well, some day I'll convince my husband to switch to Linux and we won't have to worry about that stuff anymore.
Seriously, what is the big deal about DVD playback? Sure, it was cool back when the PS2 came out and no one had a DVD player, but now everyone does. Also, the reason the Wii is going to be so much cheaper than the PS3 and Xbox360 is because they're ignoring everything besides what will make fun games. DVD playback isn't nescessary for fun games. Not to mention, the DVD playback liscensing fees go to Sony (amoung others). Why should Nintendo send money to their competitor so that their product has a feature most won't use? I just don't get it.
I agree with your suggestions. I think if I found a Coke ad in Final Fantasy XII, I'd start beating people with the game box. Yet Top Spin is covered with ads (I don't think my charactor has any clothes without brand logos) yet I love that game. I think the only question those looking to put ads in a game need to ask is "Does the ad fit in the gameworld?". Unless the game is free, then the only question is how annoying are the ads.
I can play my songs just fine in my Linux box, thank you, because I don't buy DRMed crap. To be fair, even if I did buy DRMed crap, I could probably still play it. With Linux, if you put in enough time, you can make it do whatever you want. With Mac and Windows, if you want to do something don't want or didn't intend, give up now because even if you could get it to work it will always be a cheap ass hack that will never work right.
Linux isn't useless as a desktop, in fact, it's the only thing I'd ever use on my desktops. It does everything and more that my friends' Windows and Mac boxes do, except sell me crap I don't want to buy from people who don't want to sell to me. I'm not switching just for that.
A robot that knows its position can tell humans, and can do different things nased on its position. A rock can do neither, so we can easily label robots as more aware.
Of course, I don't think robots are self-aware in the sense of having a conscious personhood, and I think it's pushing things a bit to say that since robots have a basic level of awareness they are self-aware. My cats are more self-aware than any robot we could concievably build at this point in time.
That's because feral cats are wildlife and wouldn't use litter boxes. Do you see racoons using litterboxes? Do you yell at people with birdfeeders when you find bird shit on your car?
If you really want to help the situation, don't take the cats to shelters hoping for the off-chance that they'll euthanize it. Research feral colony management and then help her manage it right. Trap and neuter the ones she misses, and talk to her about proper colony maintaince and make sure she knows that bringing cats from shelters and feeding them excessively are bad ideas. That's the best way for you to get the cat population under control. Even if you were allowed with local ordinances and stuff to shoot the cats when you see them, you'll never run out of cats to shoot and you'll still find shit in your garden. I know you think she's crazy, and she doesn't sound very responsible to me, but I think your best bet is to work with her, not against her.
Because, as I told you in my response to your post about it, it is NOT a feral cat colony, managed or otherwise. It's a cat hoarder's house. Big difference.
A feral cat colony is a location where cats who are completely wild and never handled by humans gather (they are usually the descendents of former housepets abandoned outside). A managed feral cat colony is where a human comes in and traps, neuters, and marks every cat and watches the colony for non-neutered cats wandering in. Depending on the person's resources and the natural resources of the area, the person may or may not feed the cats, build shelters for them, or provide veterinary care. Feral cats are not pets, they are wild animals living in the wild, and the manager is not their owner, the manager is a person who prevents the colony from growing unbounded and spreading disease and destroying property.
A cat hoarder's house is very different. A cat hoarder starts out as a pet owner, but aquires too many pets to take care of. Their house and property become unliveable as the cat population grows unbounded. The cats are not feral; while, like ferals, they may become unable to be handled from lack of attention (there's only so many cats a single cat lady can handle), however, they are completely unable to care for themselves like ferals can. A feral colony will not stink, nor will there be shit laying around for toddlers to find. Cats are very clean animals and ferals will bury their shit (they don't want to smell it either!) but cats of a cat hoarder aren't able to because they are so overpopulated and so dependant on her (very rarely is it him).
It doesn't matter if your neighbor says it is a feral colony; from your description it is clearly not. A person with more cats than they can handle that are freely breeding and leaving shit around is a cat hoarder and is mentally ill and a danger to themselves and others. Please, call your police or animal control officer and stop your neighbor. I have dealt with cat hoarders and it is always a tragically sad situation that must result in the hoarder being seperated from all animals permanently. Please do not confuse your neighbor for legimate animal welfare workers (like feral cat colony managers) because, no matter what she says her intentions are, she is only hurting the animals. Maybe I'm sounding like I'm assuming too much, but if your description of her is accurate then I am not.
Notice how we always have deer overpopulation problems? Hunters keep shooting them, but then they just mate and make more.
I know it seems counterintuitve. Why should it matter if you kill an animal or neuter it, either way, it won't reproduce? But it does. If you talk to people who've done trap-and-euthanize, you'll find that they just kieep finding more and more cats; their work is never done (just like deer). Whereas with trap-and-neuter, you do the initial neutering, and then you're done; the colony gets stable rather quickly. I know this sounds counterintuitive, but do some research and you'll find that this is how it works.
First I'd have to get it. iTunes doesn't run on my computer, remember?
I'm not saying they should be a charity. I'm saying I am not their customer because they refuse to sell to me. They could easily sell to me if they got rid of their DRM and allowed me to pay for and download their songs from a website, but they're afaid I might then, which I'm perfectly able to do anyways. DRM is dumb.
That's not a feral cat coloney. The lady behind you is a "cat hoarder", and it's not a hobby. It's a mental illness that is a serious danger to the cats, to her, and to you and the rest of her neighbors. You need to call the police on her and get her to stop (cat hoarding violates many animal cruelty laws, as well as many local ordinances on property maintaince and other things), if for no other reason than to prevent your toddlers from playing with cat shit. Yes, the cats will likely be euthanized, and even though I'm usually against euthanization I can tell you without a doubt and with all the love in my heart for cats that euthanization is better for a cat than living with a cat hoarder. Seriously, you have to stop her. Don't just deal with your toddlers picking up shit, call the police.
When you kill a bunch of feral cats, the other feral cats, now that the other cats don't have to fight for food, they breed more and create even more cats than there were before. Most species of animals will instictively mate more when they see their species is getting underpopulated, so if you kill a bunch (and there's really no way to kill them all at once), they'll just make more and more so you'll never be able to stop. However, when the trap-and-neuter method, the insticts to mate to prevent extinction never kick in so you don't have cats mating excessively while you're trying to find them all.
Huh? Why would the car, or a digital song, evaporate when copied?
I guess there's DRM that could do that, but that's just a reason to be against DRM.
If copying cars worked like copying (nonDRM) music, then I wouldn't give a damn if you copied my car. The problem with stealing is that the original owner can no longer enjoy what they owned; if you steal my car, I can't drive to work. Copyright infringement is obviously different from that, because if you copy all my music, I don't care because I can still enjoy it. Copyright infringement is bad in a different way; it means that an artist might became really popular yet not get any money for his/her hard work that everyone enjoys. However, that's not a given. iTunes has been a huge success, even though the music doesn't play on non-iPods and the same music is available nonDRMed for *free* at any pirate site. I think the **AAs (not that they care what I think) should just concentrate getting out good products at reasonable sites, instead of sueing their customers, and then I don't think piracy would be a problem for them.
Yeah, I thought someone would call me out on my pro-stealing everything attitude... Oh wait, I DIDN'T advocate stealing anything.
My issues with iTunes DRM is because I cannot buy music from iTunes and play it on my computer, which runs Linux. Sure, I could run it with wine, but appearently Apple likes to try to break wine compatibility in iTunes patches. Sorry, I feel that DRM that could randomly make all my paid for music *unplayable* because some company decides they don't like my software isn't reasonable.
In fact, that's my issue with all DRM. I don't want some company deciding that they don't want me playing my legitimatly bought, non-copied music, videos, etc. And if I have to *brake* that DRM to play my legitimatly bought stuff (for instance, when I use deCSS to watch my DVDs on my computer) I *really* don't like that being illegal. Also, we don't have to look too far to see that DRM that *really sucks* is already here, no slippery slope required. Look at Sony's rootkits. Look at Starforce's crap. Oh, Sony had to give away free cds to those it rootkited. So sad for Sony.
If you sell a reasonably priced, quality product, then I believe most people will buy it instead of pirate, and the people who would still pirate (not that I condone it) probably wouldn't have given you money no matter what you did. If you sell products crippled by DRM, then you're going to annoy your customers and then they'll turn to the pirates to get your product hassle-free. Of course, the big companies ignore this, but there's always creative commons and indys to get our stuff through when the big companies are being idiots.
I do like children. You don't know me.
There's a large difference in development between a embryo at 6 weeks and a fetus at 2.5 months. The line between embryo and fetus is at about 8 weeks, and there's a reason for that.
I don't know how I would have felt if I miscarried at 2.5 months instead of when I did. Maybe I would have cried like you did. I don't know. When I miscarried though, there wasn't anything for me to look at and say "That could have been my child". There was a lot of blood and tissue, but most of the tissue was probably not even the embryo, just the other stuff that builds up for pregnancy. There was just really nothing for me to cry over. I'm sorry for your loss, and I'm sorry if my story makes you mad, but our situations were rather different, and I was talking about very early miscarriages, not later ones like you and your wife went through.