If one guy won't sign an NDA, there are thousands of other who will. Just pick another programmer.
Let's not forget there are also thousands of others who don't understand an NDA and will disclose important information regardless, requiring you to take them to court at your cost to sue them for damages - good luck getting your money's worth from that.
No it won't, because they won't get more money magically appearing.
I didn't mention money would magically appear.
People don't pirate movies and then put their savings into the bank; they spend their money on movies they are sure they will like, and they steal the ones they're on the fence about.
Your generalization does not apply to all pirates, nor have you even given reasonable sources to confirm that this is even a majority.
If you remove the piracy option, they will still go to the blockbusters and simply do without the rest.
Being someone who has watched DRM work first hand with titles from Egosoft, where piracy required you to disconnect your CDROM in order to work around the DRM (because there was no crack for it at the time) actually caused many in this community that I am familiar with to buy the game instead of deal with the difficulty of pirating. That works against your given information.
This doesn't translate to more revenues because you lose a lot of word-of-mouth, so those people who actually buy a lot of movies won't hear from their pirating friends that the latest film was great.
Egosoft tells me otherwise, when they remove their DRM on their products, they don't seem to see a significant increase in sales, they generally see it on special offers. This could be a case that many people would believe their products to be crap, but then they wouldn't have a zealotry problem with their X series of games then, no?
Remember when the Academy Awards featured mostly movies nobody had seen?
We don't have an "Academy Awards" here.
Anyway, back to the subject, since you missed my point entirely. The new generations won't have any hate towards these industries that terminated piracy because they wouldn't really have experienced their pirating ability taken away from them. In doing so, they'll be less inclined to not buy something on principle or cause problems as you suggest.
Actually, they should be. Because those thieves often pay for things that support the people who hold up the *AAs... They attend concerts, buy memorabilia and swag and act as walking advertisements for the artists who create the product the AAs spend so much time and money protecting.
Knowing a good amount of individuals who pirate content, I don't know where you're getting this from. I guess pirates where you're from are 'better' in that sense, but this certainly does not apply to all pirates.
What they don't seem to understand at all, however, is that they may seriously ANGER this category of consumer with their agressive legal actions, and that they will thus potentially alienate 10s of millions of potential paying viewers users from consuming Hollywood/MPAA/RIAA content altogether.
You seem fairly short sighted, even if this worst case scenario happens, the coming generation will not have this once accessible pirate systems, which would translate into more revenues because you've limited the sources where they can get said content.
Ten years of "child porn and infant rape fantasies to hundreds of victims", and police "they tried and found no trails, he's too good we won't investigate"?
I didn't say "too good we won't investigate", I said "The police say that he is "good at what he does."", which doesn't imply they didn't investigate, it implies they have to leads to act on. Police can investigate all they want, but without evidence, they cannot act.
No, it is quite clear that they do not support cyber bullying, by refusing to provide a venue for it to continue in.
It's clear they support it by allowing a stalker/bully to essentially prevent them from being able to do things any other person is able to.
Bullying them into accommodating the cyberstalker seems to me to be counterproductive.
It's clear this is the language the company understands, they give into this sort of thing, so use the same methodology to either force them give back the project because it's causing more problems by removing it or they will find another solution which doesn't rely on giving into a stalker/bully 'winning'.
But it's so nice to have someone to be outraged on behalf of, isn't it?
Since you need to be a backer to post comments to Kickstart-pages, couldn't she get the stalkers details that way?
Going to make an assumption here, since she's made it clear that his identity is not known. It gets traced to a pre-paid credit card that has no actual real name or real address assigned to it (or even worse, someone else's real life details without verification required on these cards), useful details?
Don't blame the website for not wanting to put up with your baggage. Blame the stalker. Take legal matters in your own hands and go after him/her.
Since you are clearly informed on this situation. I would ask you a question of "how?", considering the article mentions she had been in contact with the FBI who had bigger things to deal with and the police who claim this person is good at what he does.
I await your detailed response that she is perfectly capable of doing and getting a 100% success rate as your initial post implies.
The solution is clear, start posting high volumes of messages on all the other projects for supporting kickstarter, an organization that clearly supports 'cyber bullying'. I would imagine that after a significant amount of projects have been shut down, they'd turn around and actually fix the problem properly.
Actually, most people aren't mad because the ending is sad/tragic. Way to buy into propaganda. If you bother to read what everyone has said or listened to the countless youtube comments, there's one united message:
The endings are discontinuous in flow from the rest of the games.
You clearly haven't read them then. Most of them say the endings sucks and doesn't say why. A good chunk make stupid comments like "Why Shepard has to die in the ending", which clearly shows they didn't really play through all the possible endings and just assumed the ending they got was it.
I am just seeing people getting on the band wagon here for the sake of it.
For instance, why were my crew, whom were completely loyal to me through the games and fought to their bitter ends on every other mission... suddenly running from battle?
Sorry. I very rarely see this honestly in comments. The biggest thing I see when it comes to complaints is "choices", in a game that didn't really offer you the ability to change the larger point of the storyline significantly, ever. I'm not going to pick and choose which things I see only, going by the majority here.
Also, I didn't assume they were running either, I just assumed it would be something unlocked in future DLC, and lo'behold, they are coming out with new DLC that is going to clarify that. That was sooo hard to guess, really.
Really? A last minute super villain that supplants the existing villain armada? That's introduced in 14 lines?
I don't see the problem here? I really don't. I'm not sure I would have liked to have a 'villain' introduced over 14 lines, let alone a thousand lines.
My advice? Stop reading Bioware's interpretation of people's anger and actually read what people have to say.
Your advice is flawed, you didn't read the majority of stupid comments, your judgement is clearly compromised as to understanding the nature of the crowd reaction since you appear to have ignored the majority.
Imagine Bush had passed a law which could suspend the US constitution at whim
He doesn't need to in order to ignore it - Also as we know, he did. The UK is different because of common law, making accountability a problem for those in power.
Imagine he'd mandated that everyone in the country should be fingerprinted and iris-scanned and that they should be required to identify themselves digitally wherever they go (Identity Cards Act).
To be fair, this was based on the pre-existing IPS drafts for verifying identity. When IPS dropped iris scanning from their draft, so did the identity cards. Otherwise you're pretty much still required to go through the same conditions for identity verification for a passport. That identity information is stored at the IPS and on your passport in an NFC chip which is encrypted using your passport number and cryptographically signed by the IPS.
The problem with the Identity Cards Act was more to do with who had access to the database, the fact we already had passports and the penalties for not keeping information up to date on the database.
A blindly accepting majority coupled with an increasingly restrictive government is a recipe for democracy breaking. the fuck. down.
No, a European government that is not voted in by the people's of Europe is a recipe for democracy breaking down, since there is no democracy. It doesn't matter which way vote for the UK government because the European government is in control.
Slashdot Mirror
Wrong, the correct answer is, "It's a trap!"
But lunch isn't free. I don't understand.
Can you explain the ambiguity of the TCK away please.
Let's not forget there are also thousands of others who don't understand an NDA and will disclose important information regardless, requiring you to take them to court at your cost to sue them for damages - good luck getting your money's worth from that.
When it comes to decent and experienced programmers, in my experience it seems they're usually already employed.
I didn't mention money would magically appear.
Your generalization does not apply to all pirates, nor have you even given reasonable sources to confirm that this is even a majority.
Being someone who has watched DRM work first hand with titles from Egosoft, where piracy required you to disconnect your CDROM in order to work around the DRM (because there was no crack for it at the time) actually caused many in this community that I am familiar with to buy the game instead of deal with the difficulty of pirating. That works against your given information.
Egosoft tells me otherwise, when they remove their DRM on their products, they don't seem to see a significant increase in sales, they generally see it on special offers. This could be a case that many people would believe their products to be crap, but then they wouldn't have a zealotry problem with their X series of games then, no?
We don't have an "Academy Awards" here.
Anyway, back to the subject, since you missed my point entirely. The new generations won't have any hate towards these industries that terminated piracy because they wouldn't really have experienced their pirating ability taken away from them. In doing so, they'll be less inclined to not buy something on principle or cause problems as you suggest.
Knowing a good amount of individuals who pirate content, I don't know where you're getting this from. I guess pirates where you're from are 'better' in that sense, but this certainly does not apply to all pirates.
You seem fairly short sighted, even if this worst case scenario happens, the coming generation will not have this once accessible pirate systems, which would translate into more revenues because you've limited the sources where they can get said content.
I didn't say "too good we won't investigate", I said "The police say that he is "good at what he does."", which doesn't imply they didn't investigate, it implies they have to leads to act on. Police can investigate all they want, but without evidence, they cannot act.
From the story:
That doesn't tell me they didn't investigate, it tells me they looked into it and found no leads because he was decent at 'covering his tracks'.
Your comment doesn't connect the dots for me, sorry.
Wow, so tense, bro. Clearly you've never heard of this thing called "humor".
It's clear they support it by allowing a stalker/bully to essentially prevent them from being able to do things any other person is able to.
It's clear this is the language the company understands, they give into this sort of thing, so use the same methodology to either force them give back the project because it's causing more problems by removing it or they will find another solution which doesn't rely on giving into a stalker/bully 'winning'.
What?
I can't, it's wireless!
Going to make an assumption here, since she's made it clear that his identity is not known. It gets traced to a pre-paid credit card that has no actual real name or real address assigned to it (or even worse, someone else's real life details without verification required on these cards), useful details?
Kickstarter isn't an employer, what are you talking about?
Since you are clearly informed on this situation. I would ask you a question of "how?", considering the article mentions she had been in contact with the FBI who had bigger things to deal with and the police who claim this person is good at what he does.
I await your detailed response that she is perfectly capable of doing and getting a 100% success rate as your initial post implies.
For using a pseudo-name.
So... What are you wearing?
The solution is clear, start posting high volumes of messages on all the other projects for supporting kickstarter, an organization that clearly supports 'cyber bullying'. I would imagine that after a significant amount of projects have been shut down, they'd turn around and actually fix the problem properly.
The software is pretty snappy for me.
How do I enable the ribbon in KDE applications and koffice? I can't find it.
Sorry, you're not the target audience.
You clearly haven't read them then. Most of them say the endings sucks and doesn't say why. A good chunk make stupid comments like "Why Shepard has to die in the ending", which clearly shows they didn't really play through all the possible endings and just assumed the ending they got was it.
I am just seeing people getting on the band wagon here for the sake of it.
Sorry. I very rarely see this honestly in comments. The biggest thing I see when it comes to complaints is "choices", in a game that didn't really offer you the ability to change the larger point of the storyline significantly, ever. I'm not going to pick and choose which things I see only, going by the majority here.
Also, I didn't assume they were running either, I just assumed it would be something unlocked in future DLC, and lo'behold, they are coming out with new DLC that is going to clarify that. That was sooo hard to guess, really.
I don't see the problem here? I really don't. I'm not sure I would have liked to have a 'villain' introduced over 14 lines, let alone a thousand lines.
Your advice is flawed, you didn't read the majority of stupid comments, your judgement is clearly compromised as to understanding the nature of the crowd reaction since you appear to have ignored the majority.
He doesn't need to in order to ignore it - Also as we know, he did. The UK is different because of common law, making accountability a problem for those in power.
To be fair, this was based on the pre-existing IPS drafts for verifying identity. When IPS dropped iris scanning from their draft, so did the identity cards. Otherwise you're pretty much still required to go through the same conditions for identity verification for a passport. That identity information is stored at the IPS and on your passport in an NFC chip which is encrypted using your passport number and cryptographically signed by the IPS.
The problem with the Identity Cards Act was more to do with who had access to the database, the fact we already had passports and the penalties for not keeping information up to date on the database.
No, a European government that is not voted in by the people's of Europe is a recipe for democracy breaking down, since there is no democracy. It doesn't matter which way vote for the UK government because the European government is in control.