So only 10,000 of you care about this at all, and even you are too lazy or inept to do anything except passively wait the decisions of your overlords. You won't, say, campaign for the candidate you want elected, yet you expect there to be a mass exodus over a version of Firefox being available on the USA (which it would be, thanks to the Pirate Bay)?
I'm sorry if I come accross as harsh, but your combination of proposals here is ridiculous.
So why don't the 437 million of you tell your overlords to fuck off? Seriously, it's somewhere between million to one odds and thousand to one odds. Tell them to fuck off and repeal software patents. And, while you're at it, retake your countries in every other way too - the rest of us would love to have a "leader of the free world" to look up to again. All you have to do to reclaim that position is to be worth it; come on, you can do it if you try!
There's this concept called a spine. Try having one, it's been a wild success in every species that's ever tried it. Seriously, your forefathers had it, you should try having it too ; then you wouldn't have to worry about moving to other countries.
Because if the USA has it's way, it will, you will all have to suffer from the USA's laws.
Well, every project that escapes the USA is evidence against those laws.
The EU isn't exactly a bunch of angels either.
No, just rationally self-interested.
Great, leaving your largest, smartest, richest, most dynamic open market, seems smart.
The EU is a bigget market than the USA. I'm sorry to say, but the USA stopped being the leader of the free world a long time ago. The only thing you have going for you is the 1st Amendment, and even there Tor and Freenet have superceded you.
Why? It capitulates to a non-free standard, and if H.264 becomes the defacto standard for HTML5 it effectively destroys the ability of any free browsers without deep pockets behind them to compete in the market.
H.264 is a free standard in most of the world. That's the point: why should the rest of us suffer from USAs bad laws?
Google Chrome will be fine, as will Apple Safari and Microsoft Internet Explorer, but Mozilla may well be toast, and any other free alternatives that want to operate in a country that respects software patents.
So don't operate in a country that "respects" software patents. Operate in an area where it's impossible to patent a file format, such as the EU.
You don't fight a war by giving ground at every turn. Eventually you have to make a stand.
Well, moving operations out of a country where the local laws inhibit competition certainly seems like taking a stand to me. It's just a stand that happens to be inconvenient to US citizens. Maybe you should talk to your congresscritters about it?
Meanwhile, here in the free world, h.264 is an open standard, as are all file formats, so...
Hell, you're putting your life in a computer's hands on a second-by-second basis just by being within ten miles of a nuclear power plant.
Most nuclear power plants have containment buildings around their reactors, that keep anything bad from happening to anyone even if the reactors were to blow up. Newer ones also have reactor designs which the laws of physics prevent from blowing up, no matter what the controller does.
But hey, keep on scaremongering, so we can keep on enjoying breathing coal ash.
I'm not completely sure what exactly my problem is, but I updated to windows 7 64 bit on my desktop two weeks ago, and firefox crashes probably once every 20 minutes while using it.
Check your plugins. I had this problem, which was apparently caused by either "Google Update", "Google Earth Plugin" or "Wacom Dynamic Link Library" (why the Hell does a pen tablet need a browser plugin anyway?) - dunno which, since I disabled them all, and the problem went away.
As programs become ever more complex, we really need to start making it easy to isolate their subsystems so they can recover from errors without crashing...
But, to feed yourself and your family, you don't need fertilizers, tractors, etc. Unless the peasants of the past had some secret technology we didn't know about.
Peasants of the past lived in the constant fear of starvation. A single bad year would cause mass dieoffs. That's one of the reasons why Black Death was so devastating in Europe: the people were weakened by constant malnourishment.
And yes, farming without modern equipment and fertilizers very likely requires at least some techniques that have been forgotten. Most aspects of medieval life did.
Oh dear. Were people with mod points offended by my post? Did it hit a bit too close to home? Or did you consider it flamebait because you don't like the things mentioned so it's okay to censor them while people who want to censor GTA are just being silly puritans, and anyone who doesn't agree with this is clearly just trolling?
In any case, thank you for demonstrating my point.
puritan hypocrites who want to live in a "free" country but who don't want people with different tastes to really be free
This group includes everyone. Go on, browse the Net; you'll eventually find something that offends you so much you want it banned. Child porn, animal porn, Dissected-chan, Pain series, snuff films, real rape films... If you can imagine something, it's there, and someone's getting off on it; that's the dark side of Rule 34. And you, no matter what you believe, will eventually find your personal limits to what kind of tastes you can tolerate.
You could live almost indefinitely on some outback farm with some cows, as long as ravening hordes of starving cubicle-dwellers don't descend to eat your farm.
And as long as you have the equipment to farm without fuel or fertilizers. And can keep your cows from dying from illness or predators - a pack of wolfs is a lot scarier once you run out of bullets. And can somehow fix the rusted and worn-out equipment. And can transport wood from forest to cook and boil drinking water. And don't become ill, since nobody's making efficient medicine anymore. And... Sorry, farm boy, you're dead too.
It sounds like it happened because they were on some level being stupid and ignoring a well-known risk. In my book, that's an even stronger reason not to drill. We've known about that for a long time and the oil companies -still- haven't made sure this can't happen?
It could also be that it's simply impossible to eliminate the risk completely. While I doubt that the oil companies are concerned about the environment, I also find it unlikely that they want to waste valuable oil by spilling it into the ocean, not to mention get all the badwill they do when that happens.
The nasty, awful, horrible truth is that sometimes shit happens, no matter how cautious you are.
But above average is at least 49% of everybody out there. No one above average has to work 60, there are plenty of jobs looking for those 49% that don't require 60 hours.
That assumes a symmetrical gaussion distribution, and more importantly it also assumes that being just and just above average is sufficient. It's not; you have to be a lot above matemathical average before other people will stop considering you average. So it's 1-2% who are "above average" in the sense that they don't have to respond to unreasonable demands.
If 49% of the industry won't work 60 hours, it will get much harder to make the other 51% do it.
I question whether that "nightmare" of Heinlein's world is any worse than what we have today. I mean, look at the United States.
Yes, waging a genocidal war where billions die on behalf of a military dictatorship and which will likely end with the extinction of at least one intelligent species is far worse than having 20% unemployment rate, social welfare, and even *gasp* illegal immigrants. Any other dumb questions?
With picture books or multimedia or whatever, the authors are replacing the child's imagination with their own. The child may have something better or something they like more or...I don't know.
Of course, by the exact same logic, a book is replacing stories and characters the child comes up himself with something the author came up with.
The talented people in this industry do not have to work 60 hours for nothing.
The best people in any industry don't have to take shit from their employers. Most people in any industry are by definition not the best. That means that you are unlikely to be amongst them, and thus will either work 20 hours overtime a week for nothing or spend those 20 hours in a Red Queen's Race against others who also want to be best, again gaining nothing.
(For the untalented, of course, all bets are off... when you have the only job that will hire you, you have much less negotiating power).
Replace "untalented" with "average" and you're absolutely right. And, no matter how bitter a pill it might be to swallow, you are very likely about average and will forever remain so.
Of course the problem is solvable, by simply forming an union and using collective bargaining, but that requires first giving up the delusion that "I am special" that many geeks seem to have. So we meet collective force of a corporation alone, being allways in the weaker negotiation position, and wonder why we get such bad deals. But then again, it lets some of us maintain libertarian fantasies of being John Galt, so I guess it's a fair trade after all...
Corporations are owned by people. To force certain "standards of behavior" on a corporation is to say to the owners of that corporation, "You do not have the same rights to do what you want with this particular property as you have with your other property. Instead you must accept limitations of use not according to infringements of other people's fundamental rights (as is the case for all other private property), but according to the property's value to the public." Unless of course, you believe that people have a fundamental right to use other people's private property with the same freedom that they use public property.
The problem is that we are nearing a situation where everything is owned by a small set of plutocrats. This is turning into another Soviet Russia, only this time rather than the Party owning everything, it's a corporation that does.
It is true that Wikipedia is private property. On the other hand, it's also true that it has a huge influence on our society, that only grows daily. Jimbo Wales wields more power than I do; do we allow him to wield potentially unlimited power?
That's the problem with free-market capitalism: it isn't stable. When you have people competing, then sooner or later one of them will win, and each victory makes it easier to achieve the next, resulting in the victor growing in wealth and thus power without a limit. Either we put limits to how much a single person can own, or we put limits to what someone owning a lot can do with that property (and thus how he can wield the power inherent in it), or we declare that property rights are more important than freedom and let them become dictators. Those are the logical alternatives; which one is it going to be?
How valuable/powerful should a corporation be before it's controlled by the government "for the common good"? Is it the right (maybe you believe "duty") of government to punish those who have been successful enough to build a large corporation, by slowly removing the owner's property rights?
This is a strawman. It's not a question of punishment, it's the question of protecting the rest of us from unrestricted use of power. As for what limits should apply at what size, that's a question for experts to answer.
Heh, my friend and I were laughing last week when her textbook cited wikipedia...
...because honesty is something to be mocked.
For most purposes, Wikipedia is just as (un)reliable as any other source. And on the other hand, no source is significantly more reliable, since they ultimately follow the same process of quoting and combining each other in a merry little circle where lies mix with truth and get blended to something that may or may not resemble reality somewhat.
True, and that rises interesting questions about whether the 1st Amendment or other laws like it are still sufficient in modern day. When corporations near governments in their power, shouldn't they be subjected to the same standards of behaviour?
I'm soooo tired of people responding with this brain dead, flat out stupid response.
Well, you should have a good refutation then, since you've had plenty of time to think one up. Let's see...
It is stealing. Period.
Yes, I can see that sparkle already. Saying "period" makes an assertion unassailable. How ingenious.
Legally, different laws cover it and this particular form of THEFT is called copyright infringement.
If it's theft then why does it need another set of laws to cover it? Wouldn't simply forbidding thievery do the trick?
Some forms of theft are called embezzlement. Others are called fraud. So on and so on. Regardless of the exact legal classification, this is a form of stealing.
Embezzlement is, arguably a form of stealing, but fraud is not. Fraud is lying to get someone to voluntarily part with their funds or other possessions, while stealing means taking them against the owner's permission.
Period.
Ah, another brilliant use of "period" to back unbacked assertions.
Stop painting a turd and calling it candy. Stealing is stealing and you're a thief if you do this.
Repeating an assertion over and over again doesn't make it true. You have yet to show any reason why I or anyone else should consider copyright infringement theft.
Period.
And a third period. Do you perhaps think that your arguments can't stand on their own?
The idiocy of your position is, "its not killing - its murder." Ya, 'cuz manslaughter is so much better than first degree murder.
Absurd analogies don't prove your assertion.
You can easily identify scummy people because they are the ones who ignorantly defend criminals by trying to frame the crimes in a more socially accepted light.
Copyright infringement is socially accepted, as proven by the fact that millions are engaging at it all the time. And why wouldn't it be, when its opponents seem unable to back their positions with anything besides circular logic and trying to associate it with murder?
No, I guess you didn't have a good refutation after all. Perhaps you should consider the possibility that you just might be just plain wrong?
And the idea that "The CPU is too slow" is the reason for the Wii not making yet-another-year-of-record-sales... That doesn't make sense. As we all know, Super Mario Brothers (the original one for the NES) is fun despite having ugly graphics. It's not how the game looks, it's how the game _plays_.
Hardware limits gameplay options. For example, consoles have traditionally had very little memory, which means that their games can only store a small amount of state information. In practical terms that means either small, closed playing areas or having enemies and other objects appear from nowhere. Both Final Fantasy's infamous random battles and GTA's cars that appear/disappear when you turn your back for a second are symptoms of this problem.
And since you mentioned SMB: the reason you couldn't go left in the first game was that the memory control chip in the cartridge - which was used to get past the one-screen limit imposed by NES's own hardware - was unable to "scroll back" to areas of ROM that had already been passed. That's the main advantage of cartridges: new games could come with their own hardware, allowing the console to evolve over its lifetime. Optical disks don't allow that, so we're not going to see things like Starwing - which came with its own custom GPU - again.
I just played Distant World, where a large galaxy requires 2 gigabytes of memory. You simply can't do something like that in a console. Underpowered CPU means that Wii can't have decent physics engine or good AI, as these are both CPU intensive tasks; lack of memory means that it's unable to keep track of lots of state, thus limiting the complexity and size of gameworlds. You can still make good games for it, of course, such as Super Mario Galaxy or Zelda, but that doesn't mean that limitations magically stop being limitations, only that skilled people do good job even with handicaps.
Like the summary said, it's so far behind the other consoles, not to mention PC's, that it requires a completely separate codebase. Basically, all the good Wii games are made by Nintendo itself, and it can't make them fast enough to keep Wii competitive in gamer's eyes.
Third party games need to either be completely redone for Wii, which is expensive and usually results in far inferior experience, or they need to be from few generations ago in the first place.
it's cheap to produce and sells acceptably well.
For now. It won't keep on selling as the other consoles keep on getting more and prettier games.
I think that Nintendo made a serious tactical error by targeting "casual" gamers. A casual gamer might shell out a few bucks for World of Goo or Popcap stuff, but paying $50+ for a game you're only casually interested in? Not going to happen, at least not more than a few times.
While Sony and Microsoft lost a fortune with their super-duper-powerful machines, Nintendo is profitable all the way. IT PRINTS MONEY!
Nintendo may be profitable, but it cost them their reputation. There was a time they were synonymous with gaming; now they're firmly latched into the el cheapo lodge. Time will tell if it was worth it; my personal guess: no.
Except that copyright infringement isn't stealing, it's copyright infringement. It might be against the laws Disney paid for, but it's not morally wrong, unlike stealing.
I, for one, welcome our new copyright ignoring overlords. Down with censorship and intellectual property, long live freedom of communication. And to Hell with Disney and their copyright hoarding cohorts.
Why? Even pirating costs something. User has to find copy, download it and get it working (also, he must have lerned how to do each of the three things). His time is not "free". Hell, even intent of pirating something means it is worth at least something to downloader.
On the other hand, the end result is a product that's superior to that sold on a shop. A pirated copy doesn't need a CD in the drive to start, nor does it hang on DRM check (Morrowind, I'm looking at you).
When the pirated copy is less likely to infect your system with Starforce or other malware than the official one, you know that game publishers have gone wrong.
You have an hour a night? You can complete a great RPG in 2 months.
Assuming that it comes in hour-sized chunks, yes. If it doesn't, you're exiting and re-entering scenes in the middle of them, which is not fun.
I don't think the problem is the length of the game, but your ADD.
ADD refers to an inability to keep one's attention in a single subject for any length of time, while this is about the inability to concentrate on a subject for a while, do something else for a day, and return to where you were.
That said, since games nowadays aim for a "movie-like" experience, ask yourself this: would you want to sit through a 60-hour movie?
Slashdot Mirror
So only 10,000 of you care about this at all, and even you are too lazy or inept to do anything except passively wait the decisions of your overlords. You won't, say, campaign for the candidate you want elected, yet you expect there to be a mass exodus over a version of Firefox being available on the USA (which it would be, thanks to the Pirate Bay)?
I'm sorry if I come accross as harsh, but your combination of proposals here is ridiculous.
So why don't the 437 million of you tell your overlords to fuck off? Seriously, it's somewhere between million to one odds and thousand to one odds. Tell them to fuck off and repeal software patents. And, while you're at it, retake your countries in every other way too - the rest of us would love to have a "leader of the free world" to look up to again. All you have to do to reclaim that position is to be worth it; come on, you can do it if you try!
There's this concept called a spine. Try having one, it's been a wild success in every species that's ever tried it. Seriously, your forefathers had it, you should try having it too ; then you wouldn't have to worry about moving to other countries.
Well, every project that escapes the USA is evidence against those laws.
No, just rationally self-interested.
The EU is a bigget market than the USA. I'm sorry to say, but the USA stopped being the leader of the free world a long time ago. The only thing you have going for you is the 1st Amendment, and even there Tor and Freenet have superceded you.
H.264 is a free standard in most of the world. That's the point: why should the rest of us suffer from USAs bad laws?
So don't operate in a country that "respects" software patents. Operate in an area where it's impossible to patent a file format, such as the EU.
Well, moving operations out of a country where the local laws inhibit competition certainly seems like taking a stand to me. It's just a stand that happens to be inconvenient to US citizens. Maybe you should talk to your congresscritters about it?
Meanwhile, here in the free world, h.264 is an open standard, as are all file formats, so...
It's convenient to have laws that make everyone a criminal, now isn't it?
Most nuclear power plants have containment buildings around their reactors, that keep anything bad from happening to anyone even if the reactors were to blow up. Newer ones also have reactor designs which the laws of physics prevent from blowing up, no matter what the controller does.
But hey, keep on scaremongering, so we can keep on enjoying breathing coal ash.
Check your plugins. I had this problem, which was apparently caused by either "Google Update", "Google Earth Plugin" or "Wacom Dynamic Link Library" (why the Hell does a pen tablet need a browser plugin anyway?) - dunno which, since I disabled them all, and the problem went away.
As programs become ever more complex, we really need to start making it easy to isolate their subsystems so they can recover from errors without crashing...
Peasants of the past lived in the constant fear of starvation. A single bad year would cause mass dieoffs. That's one of the reasons why Black Death was so devastating in Europe: the people were weakened by constant malnourishment.
And yes, farming without modern equipment and fertilizers very likely requires at least some techniques that have been forgotten. Most aspects of medieval life did.
Oh dear. Were people with mod points offended by my post? Did it hit a bit too close to home? Or did you consider it flamebait because you don't like the things mentioned so it's okay to censor them while people who want to censor GTA are just being silly puritans, and anyone who doesn't agree with this is clearly just trolling?
In any case, thank you for demonstrating my point.
This group includes everyone. Go on, browse the Net; you'll eventually find something that offends you so much you want it banned. Child porn, animal porn, Dissected-chan, Pain series, snuff films, real rape films... If you can imagine something, it's there, and someone's getting off on it; that's the dark side of Rule 34. And you, no matter what you believe, will eventually find your personal limits to what kind of tastes you can tolerate.
And as long as you have the equipment to farm without fuel or fertilizers. And can keep your cows from dying from illness or predators - a pack of wolfs is a lot scarier once you run out of bullets. And can somehow fix the rusted and worn-out equipment. And can transport wood from forest to cook and boil drinking water. And don't become ill, since nobody's making efficient medicine anymore. And... Sorry, farm boy, you're dead too.
It could also be that it's simply impossible to eliminate the risk completely. While I doubt that the oil companies are concerned about the environment, I also find it unlikely that they want to waste valuable oil by spilling it into the ocean, not to mention get all the badwill they do when that happens.
The nasty, awful, horrible truth is that sometimes shit happens, no matter how cautious you are.
That assumes a symmetrical gaussion distribution, and more importantly it also assumes that being just and just above average is sufficient. It's not; you have to be a lot above matemathical average before other people will stop considering you average. So it's 1-2% who are "above average" in the sense that they don't have to respond to unreasonable demands.
Yes, that's the whole point of unionization.
Yes, waging a genocidal war where billions die on behalf of a military dictatorship and which will likely end with the extinction of at least one intelligent species is far worse than having 20% unemployment rate, social welfare, and even *gasp* illegal immigrants. Any other dumb questions?
Dunno about the prison thing, thought.
Of course, by the exact same logic, a book is replacing stories and characters the child comes up himself with something the author came up with.
The best people in any industry don't have to take shit from their employers. Most people in any industry are by definition not the best. That means that you are unlikely to be amongst them, and thus will either work 20 hours overtime a week for nothing or spend those 20 hours in a Red Queen's Race against others who also want to be best, again gaining nothing.
Replace "untalented" with "average" and you're absolutely right. And, no matter how bitter a pill it might be to swallow, you are very likely about average and will forever remain so.
Of course the problem is solvable, by simply forming an union and using collective bargaining, but that requires first giving up the delusion that "I am special" that many geeks seem to have. So we meet collective force of a corporation alone, being allways in the weaker negotiation position, and wonder why we get such bad deals. But then again, it lets some of us maintain libertarian fantasies of being John Galt, so I guess it's a fair trade after all...
The problem is that we are nearing a situation where everything is owned by a small set of plutocrats. This is turning into another Soviet Russia, only this time rather than the Party owning everything, it's a corporation that does.
It is true that Wikipedia is private property. On the other hand, it's also true that it has a huge influence on our society, that only grows daily. Jimbo Wales wields more power than I do; do we allow him to wield potentially unlimited power?
That's the problem with free-market capitalism: it isn't stable. When you have people competing, then sooner or later one of them will win, and each victory makes it easier to achieve the next, resulting in the victor growing in wealth and thus power without a limit. Either we put limits to how much a single person can own, or we put limits to what someone owning a lot can do with that property (and thus how he can wield the power inherent in it), or we declare that property rights are more important than freedom and let them become dictators. Those are the logical alternatives; which one is it going to be?
This is a strawman. It's not a question of punishment, it's the question of protecting the rest of us from unrestricted use of power. As for what limits should apply at what size, that's a question for experts to answer.
...because honesty is something to be mocked.
For most purposes, Wikipedia is just as (un)reliable as any other source. And on the other hand, no source is significantly more reliable, since they ultimately follow the same process of quoting and combining each other in a merry little circle where lies mix with truth and get blended to something that may or may not resemble reality somewhat.
True, and that rises interesting questions about whether the 1st Amendment or other laws like it are still sufficient in modern day. When corporations near governments in their power, shouldn't they be subjected to the same standards of behaviour?
Well, you should have a good refutation then, since you've had plenty of time to think one up. Let's see...
Yes, I can see that sparkle already. Saying "period" makes an assertion unassailable. How ingenious.
If it's theft then why does it need another set of laws to cover it? Wouldn't simply forbidding thievery do the trick?
Embezzlement is, arguably a form of stealing, but fraud is not. Fraud is lying to get someone to voluntarily part with their funds or other possessions, while stealing means taking them against the owner's permission.
Ah, another brilliant use of "period" to back unbacked assertions.
Repeating an assertion over and over again doesn't make it true. You have yet to show any reason why I or anyone else should consider copyright infringement theft.
And a third period. Do you perhaps think that your arguments can't stand on their own?
Absurd analogies don't prove your assertion.
Copyright infringement is socially accepted, as proven by the fact that millions are engaging at it all the time. And why wouldn't it be, when its opponents seem unable to back their positions with anything besides circular logic and trying to associate it with murder?
No, I guess you didn't have a good refutation after all. Perhaps you should consider the possibility that you just might be just plain wrong?
Hardware limits gameplay options. For example, consoles have traditionally had very little memory, which means that their games can only store a small amount of state information. In practical terms that means either small, closed playing areas or having enemies and other objects appear from nowhere. Both Final Fantasy's infamous random battles and GTA's cars that appear/disappear when you turn your back for a second are symptoms of this problem.
And since you mentioned SMB: the reason you couldn't go left in the first game was that the memory control chip in the cartridge - which was used to get past the one-screen limit imposed by NES's own hardware - was unable to "scroll back" to areas of ROM that had already been passed. That's the main advantage of cartridges: new games could come with their own hardware, allowing the console to evolve over its lifetime. Optical disks don't allow that, so we're not going to see things like Starwing - which came with its own custom GPU - again.
I just played Distant World, where a large galaxy requires 2 gigabytes of memory. You simply can't do something like that in a console. Underpowered CPU means that Wii can't have decent physics engine or good AI, as these are both CPU intensive tasks; lack of memory means that it's unable to keep track of lots of state, thus limiting the complexity and size of gameworlds. You can still make good games for it, of course, such as Super Mario Galaxy or Zelda, but that doesn't mean that limitations magically stop being limitations, only that skilled people do good job even with handicaps.
Like the summary said, it's so far behind the other consoles, not to mention PC's, that it requires a completely separate codebase. Basically, all the good Wii games are made by Nintendo itself, and it can't make them fast enough to keep Wii competitive in gamer's eyes.
Third party games need to either be completely redone for Wii, which is expensive and usually results in far inferior experience, or they need to be from few generations ago in the first place.
For now. It won't keep on selling as the other consoles keep on getting more and prettier games.
I think that Nintendo made a serious tactical error by targeting "casual" gamers. A casual gamer might shell out a few bucks for World of Goo or Popcap stuff, but paying $50+ for a game you're only casually interested in? Not going to happen, at least not more than a few times.
Nintendo may be profitable, but it cost them their reputation. There was a time they were synonymous with gaming; now they're firmly latched into the el cheapo lodge. Time will tell if it was worth it; my personal guess: no.
Except that copyright infringement isn't stealing, it's copyright infringement. It might be against the laws Disney paid for, but it's not morally wrong, unlike stealing.
I, for one, welcome our new copyright ignoring overlords. Down with censorship and intellectual property, long live freedom of communication. And to Hell with Disney and their copyright hoarding cohorts.
On the other hand, the end result is a product that's superior to that sold on a shop. A pirated copy doesn't need a CD in the drive to start, nor does it hang on DRM check (Morrowind, I'm looking at you).
When the pirated copy is less likely to infect your system with Starforce or other malware than the official one, you know that game publishers have gone wrong.
Assuming that it comes in hour-sized chunks, yes. If it doesn't, you're exiting and re-entering scenes in the middle of them, which is not fun.
ADD refers to an inability to keep one's attention in a single subject for any length of time, while this is about the inability to concentrate on a subject for a while, do something else for a day, and return to where you were.
That said, since games nowadays aim for a "movie-like" experience, ask yourself this: would you want to sit through a 60-hour movie?