With the observation of internet usasge, the cameras on the street everywhere, etc. it looks like it is turning into a "police state".
Is that it? That's all you have?
You know what, I've lived in different countries and I recognise a police state when I'm in one. Internet monitoring and cameras does not equal a police state.
IMO, when you have a camera in my bathroom watching me take a #2, and you have someone watching that in real time you have a real productivity problem for the economy.
Whatever game magazine you look at today, the headlines are always occupied by the next incarnation of yet-another-fps (now with even better graphics and more realistic blood, yadda yadda).
That maybe true that there are FPSes on the cover.. However, I wouldn't say games like Left 4 Dead, Dead space, Bioshock etc. are just yet-another-fps. They do really offer something unique.
The reviewer was criticizing this netbook saying that this thing was "low-end" and a glorified cellphone. Well I have no idea what kinds of cellphone you can get with a QWERTY keyboard, an RJ45 Jack, USB, 3G, Wifi an SD card slot and an 800x600 screen for $100.
However once you have your anti-virus software which you will need then you're really only left with 2 apps. If you have spyware software too then you're left with one app. Genius!
My Anti-virus software has five processes. Four services and one tray application. This is ignoring the manual scanner application...
Pirated versions don't have DRM and exist regardless of the DRM on the retail copies.
All the pirate copies of "X3: Terran conflict" have DRM. The files have not been modified in the slightest. The DRM is circumvented by using daemon tools/alcohol 120% optical drive emulation software. Egosoft, has had great success with it's previous attempts at DRM, where "X3: Reunion" remained "uncracked" until they removed the DRM in a future release (Egosoft remove the DRM on their software after a year). During that time, the only way to play the game was by using optical drive emulators such as the ones mentioned while disconnecting your physical drive - It is believed this deterred piracy of the game as it made it an annoyance for pirates to use pirated copies.
In summary, the issues you came up aren't necessary true for all games and DRM does have a working effect depending on the circumstance.
I don't understand. Most games prohibit you from playing online on official servers unless you have a valid cd-key. This check is easy to implement and not intrusive at all, and provides a benefit for paying customers. So why haven't they done so in this case?
They did, they were just getting DDoSed by the sheer amount of requests hammering their servers.
Secondly, copyright is nothing less than a limit on our freedom of expression. It is unethical to suspend the publics freedom to enjoy or build upon human culture. Copyright is a dangerous path down the State, and Big Business, legislating the realm of thought.
Thirdly, I believe that artists create art for its own sake. I refuse to believe that our society is in such a sad state of affairs that artists are incentivised by material reward.
Sorry, but I like movies like the Matrix, the chronicles of riddick etc. If copyright law didn't exist, they wouldn't have had the funding to pull off what they do on a AAA quality title.
you could click "just open the folder" and still get infected. Because the autorun.inf file supported many different entries for special commands and one got considered regardless of the user's choice!
That issue was fixed a month after it was discovered, I don't have the MSDN KB article off hand though.
you can google for that page and see that it did exist, will look for other pages with examples of that Shell\Ex thingy (at least I remember that's how it looked like).
The shellexecute= and shell\Open\command= tricks haven't worked in ages. There isn't much any company/organisation can do if you don't keep your system up to date to protect against vulnerabilities.
I'm going to say this right now, that I am not a real graphics artist and while I do wish I was some great artist, I'm not... That said, I have worked extensively in the GIMP and I have been playing with Photoshop recently due to the fact someone sent me a.psd that used a layer filter that the GIMP didn't support, requiring that I work in Photoshop.
For a simple example: How long did Gimp take to get CMYK support?
You do have a point with CMYK support, but CMYK support in the GIMP is pretty decent, even though you need to load up the colour profile (which most professional print shops will do anyway). GIMP is actually better in my experience at doing colour conversions than Photoshop is with some colour profiles. While with others, it makes no difference. But, if you want to pick on history, I can mention some things about the history of Photoshop that the GIMP has which Photoshop didn't have and when Photoshop added it, it still wasn't up to par, I'll explain a bit further below.
An example that's actually bitten me, personally: Photoshop has the ability to organize layers into groups, and build a hierarchy of such layers. Last I checked, Gimp doesn't have that, and Krita doesn't have that. On some larger Photoshop files I've had to work with, this really becomes a necessity.
True, that is an annoyance. But there are plenty of things that GIMP does excel at interface wise, for example, when you consider the fact that the interface windows in the GIMP (history, navigator, layers, etc) are completely modular, can be arranged, manipulated at will in isolated, connected or tabbed windows in various fashions, something that Photoshop didn't have before the CS versions and even then, it's not capable/versatile as the GIMP's, you could even recreate the Photoshop interface if you so called wanted (without the master MDI Window).
Then there are tools that in the GIMP, in my opinion, have just been thought out better. One example is how in Photoshop you have several tools for the creation or manipulation of paths. When one tries to draw a complex path involving many curves, you need to draw the rough outline of the path first, then switch back and fourth between several tools to add/remove paths and adjust/add curves. Meanwhile, in the GIMP, this is all done with a single selection tool (which in my opinion, makes more sense), not to mention in those tools there is additionally anti-aliasing features and other small tweaks one can apply with selections at the same time that Photoshop does not offer and requires rather annoying manual work to correct after.
When you drag a handle from a curve in the GIMP, it does not create both sides at once (so you don't usually end up having to drag one back to the middle, which isn't precise and can cause confusion/unwanted effects), but rather you can create them independently. Other selection tools are better as well, such as the scissors select tool which is equivalent to the magnetic lasso. The magnetic lasso is practically unusable in Photoshop unless you are dealing with relatively basic shapes with high contrast to a background. The GIMP on the other hand provides more intelligence by creating nodes along the selection and those paths can be dragged and altered in real time in much the same way as path nodes can (of course, you can switch between paths & selections just as in Photoshop). Gimp also uses a nifty "mode" system for replacing/adding/subtracting to/from a selection. You just click a button, and it will always add or subtract. This is far better in my opinion than having to hold down a hot-key and forget to let up on it or accident depress it, thus losing a part of your selection. There is also quickmask and other nifty features...
That's just my comparison of the selection tools, there are many other enhancements in the GIMP that I think are superior in Photoshop, that said, there are some things in Photoshop that make me go "this is so obvious, why isn't this in the GIMP!?" and those items are, one you already mentioned - Layer groping, layer filters and a easy clickable CMYK profile (rather than making you locate the colour profile files).
Look, Gimp isn't Photoshop. I like Linux, and I like open source, and I use Gimp myself -- but I'm not a graphic designer, and Gimp is definitely missing large amounts of functionality that Photoshop has.
You know, when photoshop is missing simple things like a checkbox to switch anti-aliasing on and off for dragable objects (it doesn't have anti-aliasing), I really do wonder if it is superior....
Well, the BIOS was the majority of what had to be reverse engineered to get the system to be compatible back in the day.
It makes you wonder how long ago this conference he attended was, since he's still calling them "clones".
In that sense the current Apple computers are not really clones of IBM type PCs.
They're clones of Dells in my opinion, after all Dell was using EFIs way before Apple did and had a BIOS compatible EFI way before Apple on the Intel x86 platform.
Macs are certainly are more resistant than PCs to viruses and some other types of malware
Not really, I've seen vulnerabilities just as bad as the ones I see on Windows, on OS X (and eventually getting patched like it does on Windows). It just happens that nobody takes advantage of it usually, on OS X.
Slashdot Mirror
Well... He does think positive.. Why do you think his cancer tests returned positive?
Is that it? That's all you have?
You know what, I've lived in different countries and I recognise a police state when I'm in one. Internet monitoring and cameras does not equal a police state.
WTF are you talking about?
bash: nc: command not found
Never played it.
That maybe true that there are FPSes on the cover.. However, I wouldn't say games like Left 4 Dead, Dead space, Bioshock etc. are just yet-another-fps. They do really offer something unique.
A Nokia E90 can almost fulfil all these specs.
Fixed that for Ghandi and you.
My Anti-virus software has five processes. Four services and one tray application. This is ignoring the manual scanner application...
I'm on BT and I'm not getting these messages when I access thepiratebay.org ?
What.. NINETHOUSAND!? Theres no way that can be right, could it!?
I liked the game and I don't think they care if pirates like the game or not some how.
All the pirate copies of "X3: Terran conflict" have DRM. The files have not been modified in the slightest. The DRM is circumvented by using daemon tools/alcohol 120% optical drive emulation software. Egosoft, has had great success with it's previous attempts at DRM, where "X3: Reunion" remained "uncracked" until they removed the DRM in a future release (Egosoft remove the DRM on their software after a year). During that time, the only way to play the game was by using optical drive emulators such as the ones mentioned while disconnecting your physical drive - It is believed this deterred piracy of the game as it made it an annoyance for pirates to use pirated copies.
In summary, the issues you came up aren't necessary true for all games and DRM does have a working effect depending on the circumstance.
They did, they were just getting DDoSed by the sheer amount of requests hammering their servers.
Speaking from knowledge with people I've worked with -- It proved to not have much of a significance when sales was concerned.
Doom and Quake were the exception, not the rule.
The money circulates, thus helping the economy. Loan or not, that money was in the bank to begin with, so the damage was already done.
Sorry, but I like movies like the Matrix, the chronicles of riddick etc. If copyright law didn't exist, they wouldn't have had the funding to pull off what they do on a AAA quality title.
Long live copyright law.
That issue was fixed a month after it was discovered, I don't have the MSDN KB article off hand though.
The shellexecute= and shell\Open\command= tricks haven't worked in ages. There isn't much any company/organisation can do if you don't keep your system up to date to protect against vulnerabilities.
I'm going to say this right now, that I am not a real graphics artist and while I do wish I was some great artist, I'm not... That said, I have worked extensively in the GIMP and I have been playing with Photoshop recently due to the fact someone sent me a .psd that used a layer filter that the GIMP didn't support, requiring that I work in Photoshop.
You do have a point with CMYK support, but CMYK support in the GIMP is pretty decent, even though you need to load up the colour profile (which most professional print shops will do anyway). GIMP is actually better in my experience at doing colour conversions than Photoshop is with some colour profiles. While with others, it makes no difference. But, if you want to pick on history, I can mention some things about the history of Photoshop that the GIMP has which Photoshop didn't have and when Photoshop added it, it still wasn't up to par, I'll explain a bit further below.
True, that is an annoyance. But there are plenty of things that GIMP does excel at interface wise, for example, when you consider the fact that the interface windows in the GIMP (history, navigator, layers, etc) are completely modular, can be arranged, manipulated at will in isolated, connected or tabbed windows in various fashions, something that Photoshop didn't have before the CS versions and even then, it's not capable/versatile as the GIMP's, you could even recreate the Photoshop interface if you so called wanted (without the master MDI Window).
Then there are tools that in the GIMP, in my opinion, have just been thought out better. One example is how in Photoshop you have several tools for the creation or manipulation of paths. When one tries to draw a complex path involving many curves, you need to draw the rough outline of the path first, then switch back and fourth between several tools to add/remove paths and adjust/add curves. Meanwhile, in the GIMP, this is all done with a single selection tool (which in my opinion, makes more sense), not to mention in those tools there is additionally anti-aliasing features and other small tweaks one can apply with selections at the same time that Photoshop does not offer and requires rather annoying manual work to correct after.
When you drag a handle from a curve in the GIMP, it does not create both sides at once (so you don't usually end up having to drag one back to the middle, which isn't precise and can cause confusion/unwanted effects), but rather you can create them independently. Other selection tools are better as well, such as the scissors select tool which is equivalent to the magnetic lasso. The magnetic lasso is practically unusable in Photoshop unless you are dealing with relatively basic shapes with high contrast to a background. The GIMP on the other hand provides more intelligence by creating nodes along the selection and those paths can be dragged and altered in real time in much the same way as path nodes can (of course, you can switch between paths & selections just as in Photoshop). Gimp also uses a nifty "mode" system for replacing/adding/subtracting to/from a selection. You just click a button, and it will always add or subtract. This is far better in my opinion than having to hold down a hot-key and forget to let up on it or accident depress it, thus losing a part of your selection. There is also quickmask and other nifty features...
That's just my comparison of the selection tools, there are many other enhancements in the GIMP that I think are superior in Photoshop, that said, there are some things in Photoshop that make me go "this is so obvious, why isn't this in the GIMP!?" and those items are, one you already mentioned - Layer groping, layer filters and a easy clickable CMYK profile (rather than making you locate the colour profile files).
You know, when photoshop is missing simple things like a checkbox to switch anti-aliasing on and off for dragable objects (it doesn't have anti-aliasing), I really do wonder if it is superior....
It makes you wonder how long ago this conference he attended was, since he's still calling them "clones".
They're clones of Dells in my opinion, after all Dell was using EFIs way before Apple did and had a BIOS compatible EFI way before Apple on the Intel x86 platform.
I know two [1|2]
But there is a reason why there is not that many OS X viruses.
They were, but then somebody gave a shit about Mac.
It's news because it's Mac malware and Apple needs all the publicity they can get.
Hackers? You overstate the calibre of these OS X malware writers.
Not really, I've seen vulnerabilities just as bad as the ones I see on Windows, on OS X (and eventually getting patched like it does on Windows). It just happens that nobody takes advantage of it usually, on OS X.