From what I heard its not quite as all clear as that. The way they worked it to intentionally get around the rules. Basically Wind is Canadian owned, however they got pretty much ALL their capital from an Egyptian company. So they own pretty much all their debt. As such some of the Egyptian Execs sit on the board, but is still dominated by Canadians.
In this way they beat the law about foreign ownership. The other telecoms in Canada being the monopolistic greedy MF that they are caused a stink and had the CRTC review it. The CRTC found that while the letter of the law was followed, they violated the spirit of the law, as the whole purpose was to prevent foreign ownership. Wind argued that basically having your debt owned wasn't the same, just like you can own your house, yet a bank owns all your debt.
Anyway after the CRTC ruling the political got involved and the conservatives in power decided to overturn the CRTC's decision. The telecos upon seeing this took it to court. The court ruled the exact same as the CRTC. Wind I believe currently has it in appeal at the supreme court, and are awaiting a decision, but in the meantime are still operating.
Anyway the whole industry is dirty if you ask me. But I agree the waffling of decisions is stupid. If they want this to go forward they should change the law so that it is clear and not ambiguous about this issue. Basically wind is just being sneaky to try and get around it, the Conservatives are for it, but don't want to be seen as the ones to change that law as it may be a tough sell politically, the telcos are just protecting their monopoly. The consumers might be slightly better off if Wind does come to town... maybe.
The Russian's are betting that either A) the appeal is in Wind's favor, or B) that the Canadian government changes the law in question.
Considering the price tag of 6 Billion, they must know something I don't, which is scary. Perhaps they consider that they will have a stronger voice in Canada coming from Russia than from Egypt... who knows...
Well it should be an interesting case. Plenty of interesting arguments to be made either way.
I think technically speaking ISOHunt is in the right (abit shady), however the other side has political clout, which while it shouldn't enter the courtroom it probably will. There will be tremendous pressure on the court to find ISOHunt guilty of something.
Likely one of the arguments will be that ISOHunt links are 90% copyrighted products and therefor the intent is that in mind. If I was ISOHunt's lawyer I would then continue along the Google argument and say 90% of Google's links are porn, so they should be considered as that as their intent.
When ISOHunt is down, I just Google it and get it from someplace else.
It will come down to intent however. Google is ubiquitous and ISOHunt is a "wretched hive of scum and villainy".
I don't see the big deal however, other than on moral or ideal grounds (information should be free man! puff puff!). The law only applies for those with businesses operating within the US. Move your servers to Kerblackistan and be done with it. Poof. Why would you want to host in the US anyway? That's one of the cool things about this whole Internet thing...
Then the US has to try and get the case tried in Kerblackistan, and good luck with that! Just don't go to Sweden, apparently they are pushovers there.
Maybe the Key exists or maybe not and sometimes the Key both exists and doesn't at the same time depending on observation? I could read the article I suppose.... nah!
Also there are medical uses for probably most illegal drugs in one form or another, just look at Opium and Heroin. Oxycontin I hear is another as is morphine.
Just because Morphine is used medically doesn't exactly justify Heroin use... Heck if you really want to stretch I hear a common over the counter allergy medicine was used to actually make Meth...
Yes that was a good game, however much too complex for any of the consoles. I think the PC actually has a bit of a advantage in this respect. They can handle the widest variety of games of all platforms, and as such will be somewhat insulated. Also develop for one, and you can port it to the PC.
The consoles however are much more restrictive, both in hardware and in controller. The plus side (at least for MS, Sony, Nintendo) is that they are proprietary. So at the very least those companies will continue to make games for their own platforms, the question is really will anyone else. I think the article is basically speculating that over the next few years, if all the 3rd parties give up on consoles for more profitable markets, will consoles still be viable if all the games are being sole produced. That is MS makes Xbox games, Sony makes PS3 games, and Nintendo makes WII games. Will the reduction of number of titles drive consumers away from consoles?
Realistically this will not be fought over this generation of consoles but the next. Pretty much all of the current consoles are reaching the end of their life cycle soon. The big question is what those big three develop next. I think in the context of this debate, MS has the clear advantage with it's online presence including its downloadable content in the Arcade, which is basically small mini-games for cheap, which is the Angry Birds Market.
By centralizing this service to Russia, and by providing additional funds (assuming they go towards program), you perhaps allow for more development and technology being put forward for this sort of thing, rather than having two super nations running parallel programs essentially wasting money.
Sort of sucks for the USA, I'll admit. However as a human race thing, it might turn out for the best.
This will also undoubtedly be a major source of Russian pride, and may well be better funded as a result.
Anyway just thought I would throw this out there rather than all the doom and gloom I see from most.
This story probably comes about because it was announced early this week that Angry Birds made 75 MILLION dollars and used 125 thousand to develop.
Name any game anywhere developed on anything that comes even close to that kind of profit. None. Maybe Farmville? Yet another indicator, though that would also bolster PC, but not console.
Now if you are a maker of games, or an investor of makers of games, what kind of games do you want to be making? The kind that cost 30 Million to make and might make you 50 Million, if it doesn't tank. A MMO that costs 300 Million, also with potential to tank. Or a 140k game that might make you close to 100 Million? Extremely low risk, and high reward. If the 140k game tanks, who cares. Make a couple dozen more and hope one doesn't.
So simply from that perspective, you are going to draw a LOT of attention, and industry to move in that direction. Will it spell the end for consoles? No. But it might reduce the number of shops making games for those platforms. Long term this could had repercussions on 3rd party developers.
The guy accused another of Fraud, with no proof, and the other was at the time not convinced of any fraud.
As a result of that accusation, he lost his job.
He sued the jerk for defamation, and won. Legitimately so.
I do not see the issue here. You can't just go around saying whatever you please and not expect repercussions regardless of "free speech". Here is an incident that regardless of if the actually facts are "true" they were not proven, not at least in a court of law, and a guy lost his livelihood because of it. He then sued and won because of that. This is how it is supposed to work. I would also be suing the university who fired him without just cause, based on the unsubstantiated claims of a researcher who posted his "findings" on the internet.
I saw recently that they (Cogeco Cable) now offer Ultimate30 and Ultimate50 plans (30MB/s, and 50MB/s with 125GB and 150GB caps) which are priced actually more competitively for a change. I got kind of excited thinking that maybe the companies has changed... Only to find that these plans are only available in "select" areas... i.e. Probably just Toronto and maybe other large urban centers. Not available in Peterborough, Ontario anyway.
If you look at the USA, and ignore all the Walmart jerks, and software bubbles, a disproportionate amount got their money from "Hedge Funds". Now look around the world, how many others can you find? I think I found one.
These are the same Hedge Funds that bought up (and demanded, and got) all the US real estate debt, causing the whole economic problem. I wonder how many of those guys are hurting? Oh wait, none because they are all billionaires. Also if you look at the names... its the exact same people that came up with the bail out plan etc... talk about conflict of interest and self serving SOB's.
I took CS and struggled in Math. I work in my field now, and have for over 10 years. I have never even come close to using any of it. I could see if you worked in a heavy science field (say modeling some physics or something) or in actual CS theroy, but in reality I would say that 99% of CS grads never see any benefit to most of the math prerequisites they are forced to take.
I know my choice in CS school was basically determined by math which is just wrong. My first choice required high school level calculus. I didn't have it. I had to take a calculus test that if I passed would allow my acceptance. Not having a stitch in calculus you can imagine how that turned out. The worst part is that going to a small rural high school it wasn't even offered, so I couldn't take it even if I wanted to. The only alternative was to NOT go to university for a year so I could get the required calculus credit which is totally BS.
I ended up going to a a school that was more liberal arts, and thus didn't have the requirement. Though this could partially be because it was in Ontario that had grade 13 (I being from Nova Scotia only had 12 grades), and it was assumed that many took the calculus in their 13th year. Anyway the CS still had the same math requirements as any CS degree, so I still struggled. I ended up taking Calculus 100 and Linear Algebra 100 in my 5th year of University (took a year to get a GIS certificate at a collage). So here I was taking advanced 400 level CS classes while go to class with frosh for math, as well as being older than everyone except the teacher, and then only barely (she was a younger prof). Anyway I think the only reason in the end I passed (I think I got a 54%) was that the prof felt sorry for me, and understood that my degree basically hinged on me somehow magically getting over 50% in her Calc 100 class.
Anyway yes in some cases I think math was relevant. Binary Algebra made sense in terms of CS, and statistics was useful, however the rest pretty much felt like they just made them requirements simply because it was math.
Well I find it odd and strange that in a forum talking about worst movies and computers I have yet heard no one suggest Johnny Mnemonic, I mean it has Keanu Reeves in it! The whole VR thing, with the Nintendo power glove and all that I remember as being pretty silly. It also had Ice T and Henry Rollins in it!
Also a dolphin hacks stuff.
Anyway I don't remember it all that well, but it is just old enough that it probably had some pretty unrealistic technological screens and techobabble.
One of my favorites. Yes I cringe when ever I watch CSI and NCIS. Worse is that the popularity of those shows has influenced other shows, older and newer to implement the same techno-magic jackassary.
I basically just grind my teeth and roll my eyes when ever I see anything now even slightly technology related.
Also while not exactly computers, the worst abuse of technology related BS I think was in Will Smiths's masterpiece "Enemy of the State". As someone who works in GIS, the whole satellite tracking stuff made me laugh.
Its not that some customer somewhere, its the point that that customer could be you.
Granted I'm not likely to mouth off on some forum enough to get banned from anything, so likelihood is insignificant. However the simple fact that they were willing to do that to one of their paying customers, means that it could happen again, maybe to you.
So ya I was being a bit facetious, and as I said I have no intention of playing it anyway.
As to your last remark, if I have to crack something, I won't be buying it period.
So is it OK to pirate it? Probably not, but it certainly makes it more reasonable. The correct response is to simply not support it period by buying it. Which is the arrogant point Bioware/EA are trying to make. You don't have to buy our product, if you don't like it, too bad, don't buy it then.
Though I think it is illegal (though small potatoes) for EA/Bioware to sell a product/service, then after accepting payment, refuse that product/service. In a MMO its a bit different as you have a subscription and a EULA. You break the terms, they can ban your account. This is a single player game, that the guy paid for, that they then refuse to give him in the first place. At the very least they can give the guy his money back.
Its like if I go to say a car dealership, and pay them 30,000$ for a new car, then turn around and insult the salesman's mother and questionable parentage, he can't just turn around and say "no car for you!"... He certainly can give the 30k$ back and then refuse to serve the rude customer (at which point the customer can go to a different dealership). Anyway it sounds like they are being petty jerks, because apparently their customer may have been one also.
Dunno really about 2. I did play some of DA: Origins. I eventually lost interest, so not all that excited about #2. About the only thing that was "innovative" about the game was the addition of downloadable content, which I see more as a just another way to ripoff customers anyway. The loyalty of team members was interesting, but nothing new, and I found the battle mechanics painful at best.
Slashdot Mirror
I war I can really get behind!
is that I now want McDonald's for lunch, thanks!
Hey at least with Science you just have to give a mamsy pamsy explanation of some process...
With creationism, you actually got to remember the day it happened! :)
Don't believe in Physics and Science eh?
Go to the tallest building in town. Now jump. You have faith right?
See, more proof for Darwin! :)
got tired of wiping stuff over their hockey visors and having to clean their glasses upon entering the bar each time after going out for a smoke.
Ingenuity at work!
From what I heard its not quite as all clear as that. The way they worked it to intentionally get around the rules. Basically Wind is Canadian owned, however they got pretty much ALL their capital from an Egyptian company. So they own pretty much all their debt. As such some of the Egyptian Execs sit on the board, but is still dominated by Canadians.
In this way they beat the law about foreign ownership. The other telecoms in Canada being the monopolistic greedy MF that they are caused a stink and had the CRTC review it. The CRTC found that while the letter of the law was followed, they violated the spirit of the law, as the whole purpose was to prevent foreign ownership. Wind argued that basically having your debt owned wasn't the same, just like you can own your house, yet a bank owns all your debt.
Anyway after the CRTC ruling the political got involved and the conservatives in power decided to overturn the CRTC's decision. The telecos upon seeing this took it to court. The court ruled the exact same as the CRTC. Wind I believe currently has it in appeal at the supreme court, and are awaiting a decision, but in the meantime are still operating.
Anyway the whole industry is dirty if you ask me. But I agree the waffling of decisions is stupid. If they want this to go forward they should change the law so that it is clear and not ambiguous about this issue. Basically wind is just being sneaky to try and get around it, the Conservatives are for it, but don't want to be seen as the ones to change that law as it may be a tough sell politically, the telcos are just protecting their monopoly. The consumers might be slightly better off if Wind does come to town... maybe.
The Russian's are betting that either A) the appeal is in Wind's favor, or B) that the Canadian government changes the law in question.
Considering the price tag of 6 Billion, they must know something I don't, which is scary. Perhaps they consider that they will have a stronger voice in Canada coming from Russia than from Egypt... who knows...
Well it should be an interesting case. Plenty of interesting arguments to be made either way.
I think technically speaking ISOHunt is in the right (abit shady), however the other side has political clout, which while it shouldn't enter the courtroom it probably will. There will be tremendous pressure on the court to find ISOHunt guilty of something.
Likely one of the arguments will be that ISOHunt links are 90% copyrighted products and therefor the intent is that in mind. If I was ISOHunt's lawyer I would then continue along the Google argument and say 90% of Google's links are porn, so they should be considered as that as their intent.
When ISOHunt is down, I just Google it and get it from someplace else.
It will come down to intent however. Google is ubiquitous and ISOHunt is a "wretched hive of scum and villainy".
I don't see the big deal however, other than on moral or ideal grounds (information should be free man! puff puff!). The law only applies for those with businesses operating within the US. Move your servers to Kerblackistan and be done with it. Poof. Why would you want to host in the US anyway? That's one of the cool things about this whole Internet thing...
Then the US has to try and get the case tried in Kerblackistan, and good luck with that! Just don't go to Sweden, apparently they are pushovers there.
Madoff went to jail because he stole 70$ BILLION dollars mostly from other rich people and corporations.
If he was simply screwing the plebeians he'd be in Jamaica right now.
I know you are saying that in jest, but sadly I think it really is a business model that continues to be in use.
Maybe the Key exists or maybe not and sometimes the Key both exists and doesn't at the same time depending on observation? I could read the article I suppose.... nah!
90%-75% to get addicted to Meth/Cocaine?
That doesn't sound very good.
Also there are medical uses for probably most illegal drugs in one form or another, just look at Opium and Heroin. Oxycontin I hear is another as is morphine.
Just because Morphine is used medically doesn't exactly justify Heroin use... Heck if you really want to stretch I hear a common over the counter allergy medicine was used to actually make Meth...
Yes that was a good game, however much too complex for any of the consoles. I think the PC actually has a bit of a advantage in this respect. They can handle the widest variety of games of all platforms, and as such will be somewhat insulated. Also develop for one, and you can port it to the PC.
The consoles however are much more restrictive, both in hardware and in controller. The plus side (at least for MS, Sony, Nintendo) is that they are proprietary. So at the very least those companies will continue to make games for their own platforms, the question is really will anyone else. I think the article is basically speculating that over the next few years, if all the 3rd parties give up on consoles for more profitable markets, will consoles still be viable if all the games are being sole produced. That is MS makes Xbox games, Sony makes PS3 games, and Nintendo makes WII games. Will the reduction of number of titles drive consumers away from consoles?
Realistically this will not be fought over this generation of consoles but the next. Pretty much all of the current consoles are reaching the end of their life cycle soon. The big question is what those big three develop next. I think in the context of this debate, MS has the clear advantage with it's online presence including its downloadable content in the Arcade, which is basically small mini-games for cheap, which is the Angry Birds Market.
By centralizing this service to Russia, and by providing additional funds (assuming they go towards program), you perhaps allow for more development and technology being put forward for this sort of thing, rather than having two super nations running parallel programs essentially wasting money.
Sort of sucks for the USA, I'll admit. However as a human race thing, it might turn out for the best.
This will also undoubtedly be a major source of Russian pride, and may well be better funded as a result.
Anyway just thought I would throw this out there rather than all the doom and gloom I see from most.
At a purely economic level he is correct.
This story probably comes about because it was announced early this week that Angry Birds made 75 MILLION dollars and used 125 thousand to develop.
Name any game anywhere developed on anything that comes even close to that kind of profit. None. Maybe Farmville? Yet another indicator, though that would also bolster PC, but not console.
Now if you are a maker of games, or an investor of makers of games, what kind of games do you want to be making? The kind that cost 30 Million to make and might make you 50 Million, if it doesn't tank. A MMO that costs 300 Million, also with potential to tank. Or a 140k game that might make you close to 100 Million? Extremely low risk, and high reward. If the 140k game tanks, who cares. Make a couple dozen more and hope one doesn't.
So simply from that perspective, you are going to draw a LOT of attention, and industry to move in that direction. Will it spell the end for consoles? No. But it might reduce the number of shops making games for those platforms. Long term this could had repercussions on 3rd party developers.
The guy accused another of Fraud, with no proof, and the other was at the time not convinced of any fraud.
As a result of that accusation, he lost his job.
He sued the jerk for defamation, and won. Legitimately so.
I do not see the issue here. You can't just go around saying whatever you please and not expect repercussions regardless of "free speech". Here is an incident that regardless of if the actually facts are "true" they were not proven, not at least in a court of law, and a guy lost his livelihood because of it. He then sued and won because of that. This is how it is supposed to work. I would also be suing the university who fired him without just cause, based on the unsubstantiated claims of a researcher who posted his "findings" on the internet.
I am pretty sure if Gary Busey and Charlie Sheen crossed paths the world might end.
I saw recently that they (Cogeco Cable) now offer Ultimate30 and Ultimate50 plans (30MB/s, and 50MB/s with 125GB and 150GB caps) which are priced actually more competitively for a change. I got kind of excited thinking that maybe the companies has changed... Only to find that these plans are only available in "select" areas... i.e. Probably just Toronto and maybe other large urban centers. Not available in Peterborough, Ontario anyway.
I thought it sort of interesting that if you look at the list of Billionaires:
http://www.forbes.com/wealth/billionaires#p_1_s_arank_-1__-1
and look at where they got their money from.
If you look at the USA, and ignore all the Walmart jerks, and software bubbles, a disproportionate amount got their money from "Hedge Funds". Now look around the world, how many others can you find? I think I found one.
These are the same Hedge Funds that bought up (and demanded, and got) all the US real estate debt, causing the whole economic problem. I wonder how many of those guys are hurting? Oh wait, none because they are all billionaires. Also if you look at the names... its the exact same people that came up with the bail out plan etc... talk about conflict of interest and self serving SOB's.
I've had a 60GB cap in Canada for years now!
Its time your internet sucks as well!
I took CS and struggled in Math. I work in my field now, and have for over 10 years. I have never even come close to using any of it. I could see if you worked in a heavy science field (say modeling some physics or something) or in actual CS theroy, but in reality I would say that 99% of CS grads never see any benefit to most of the math prerequisites they are forced to take.
I know my choice in CS school was basically determined by math which is just wrong. My first choice required high school level calculus. I didn't have it. I had to take a calculus test that if I passed would allow my acceptance. Not having a stitch in calculus you can imagine how that turned out. The worst part is that going to a small rural high school it wasn't even offered, so I couldn't take it even if I wanted to. The only alternative was to NOT go to university for a year so I could get the required calculus credit which is totally BS.
I ended up going to a a school that was more liberal arts, and thus didn't have the requirement. Though this could partially be because it was in Ontario that had grade 13 (I being from Nova Scotia only had 12 grades), and it was assumed that many took the calculus in their 13th year. Anyway the CS still had the same math requirements as any CS degree, so I still struggled. I ended up taking Calculus 100 and Linear Algebra 100 in my 5th year of University (took a year to get a GIS certificate at a collage). So here I was taking advanced 400 level CS classes while go to class with frosh for math, as well as being older than everyone except the teacher, and then only barely (she was a younger prof). Anyway I think the only reason in the end I passed (I think I got a 54%) was that the prof felt sorry for me, and understood that my degree basically hinged on me somehow magically getting over 50% in her Calc 100 class.
Anyway yes in some cases I think math was relevant. Binary Algebra made sense in terms of CS, and statistics was useful, however the rest pretty much felt like they just made them requirements simply because it was math.
Well I find it odd and strange that in a forum talking about worst movies and computers I have yet heard no one suggest Johnny Mnemonic, I mean it has Keanu Reeves in it! The whole VR thing, with the Nintendo power glove and all that I remember as being pretty silly. It also had Ice T and Henry Rollins in it!
Also a dolphin hacks stuff.
Anyway I don't remember it all that well, but it is just old enough that it probably had some pretty unrealistic technological screens and techobabble.
http://xkcd.com/683/
One of my favorites. Yes I cringe when ever I watch CSI and NCIS. Worse is that the popularity of those shows has influenced other shows, older and newer to implement the same techno-magic jackassary.
I basically just grind my teeth and roll my eyes when ever I see anything now even slightly technology related.
Also while not exactly computers, the worst abuse of technology related BS I think was in Will Smiths's masterpiece "Enemy of the State". As someone who works in GIS, the whole satellite tracking stuff made me laugh.
Its not that some customer somewhere, its the point that that customer could be you.
Granted I'm not likely to mouth off on some forum enough to get banned from anything, so likelihood is insignificant. However the simple fact that they were willing to do that to one of their paying customers, means that it could happen again, maybe to you.
So ya I was being a bit facetious, and as I said I have no intention of playing it anyway.
As to your last remark, if I have to crack something, I won't be buying it period.
So is it OK to pirate it? Probably not, but it certainly makes it more reasonable. The correct response is to simply not support it period by buying it. Which is the arrogant point Bioware/EA are trying to make. You don't have to buy our product, if you don't like it, too bad, don't buy it then.
Though I think it is illegal (though small potatoes) for EA/Bioware to sell a product/service, then after accepting payment, refuse that product/service. In a MMO its a bit different as you have a subscription and a EULA. You break the terms, they can ban your account. This is a single player game, that the guy paid for, that they then refuse to give him in the first place. At the very least they can give the guy his money back.
Its like if I go to say a car dealership, and pay them 30,000$ for a new car, then turn around and insult the salesman's mother and questionable parentage, he can't just turn around and say "no car for you!"... He certainly can give the 30k$ back and then refuse to serve the rude customer (at which point the customer can go to a different dealership). Anyway it sounds like they are being petty jerks, because apparently their customer may have been one also.
Dunno really about 2. I did play some of DA: Origins. I eventually lost interest, so not all that excited about #2. About the only thing that was "innovative" about the game was the addition of downloadable content, which I see more as a just another way to ripoff customers anyway. The loyalty of team members was interesting, but nothing new, and I found the battle mechanics painful at best.