"Our wonderful nanny state" which state are you talking about, the odd's that I live in your's are only 1 in 50, and I never even said I live in the US, (although I do and am a proud US citizen)
And it's very possible to stop supporting a line of cars, you go bankrupt.
"That you think it would need to be mandatory for manufacturers to produce a certain quota of electric cars regardless of actual market demand shows that you if anything support this sort of overregulation."
No I dont, AND I NEVER SAID I DID. That was the legislation that was passed in california, I'm not spouting opinion, I'm correcting you're errors you moron. YOU obviously didnt see the movie.
California passed a regulation NOT ME, that stated as of year XXXX you had to offer/sell X% electric cars. The automakers didnt like this for a myriad of reasons, and in order to shoot down that argument they had to prove that either the car wasnt feasible and that there was no demand. The problem was the car worked, and there was demand. The only to to eliminate demand was to A. stop selling them. B. halt development. C. discredit them. and D. round up and destroy all the cars.
magically all demand is gone.
I haven't offered my opinion on whether it should be mandatory in any way shape or form, because frankly while I think it should be mandatory my civil liberties I enjoy tell me that I can't impose that because damned if i want someone imposing something like that on me... "For every 1000 lines of propietary code you write you must write 1 free one..."
Big thanks for not reading my post, not reading the article, and not reading or looking up any thing relevant to the discussion before responding to me with the same stupid thing you responded with the first time. The whole point of what the auto makers were doing was to ELIMINATE DEMAND because it existed.
That you think i said that demonstrates that you dont even read the posts you respond to.
But to be honest I think there should be some regulation. If you want to drive a car that gets 10 miles a gallon you should get slapped in the head. I cant charge them money since they already pay it, but if you do you definately get ZERO pity points when you complain about expensive gas and how you can't pay your bills. If there was a gas shortage however then i would go ahead and say lets start luxury taxing the morons. Don't get me wrong if you drive a hummer or a suburban and aren't hauling a ton of shit around I think you are a wasteful moron. But you have the right to be one, and spend your money as you wish. I hate saying that but i like my rights and i'm not giving them up to tell someone else how to be responsible.
our society had nothing to do with the death of the Ev-1. If i didnt comment on this post i would mod you down for being stupid. Pay for damages, what damages? There was nothing wrong with it other than that people liked it. The fact that they existed meant that they could be made and that meant that the companies couldnt say it was infeasible and would have to sell 20% electric cars. they didnt want to do that, so they yanked them. They literally had to pry them from the owners. And then despite people wanting to buy out their EV-1's they were all destroyed.
I really don't see how you can connect our admittedly litigious society to this one. I'm guessing you either a. work for the auto industry b. didn't see the movie or do any homework in terms of reading about what you are trying to talk about
yes for the past 20 years its been a case of CD killed the algorithm and all thats mattered has been graphics. but that doesn't make it or the games good or better.
ever play QBclub for N64 (circa 98-00)? plays miserably, but looks great. instead play NFL '99 for PS1 from around the same time period it doesn't look nearly as good, but it plays phenomanlly better.
The problem is that somewhere along the way gamers were somehow led to believe that graphics were one of the most important pieces of a game and of gameplay when by definition they dont matter nearly as much.
A shitty game that has amazing graphics is still a shitty game. I don't care how great the physics are for the individual blades of grass and for the ceiling fans that actually swing around when you jump into them in Halo2/HL2 etc that doesn't add to the gameplay.
why have emulators allowing us to play classic atari, nintendo, snes, and sega games been so prevalent? because they were good games and the graphics weren't the major issue.
Yes used properly they can be amazing (ff7 made excellent use of its extra space, xenosaga does too) and even more modern things like Devil May Cry and God of War etc.
Heck I still play GTA2 because its a very fun game to play, i dont care that its overhead and essentially 2D, or that the cars don't like ultra lifelike. Who gives a crap, would it make the game play significantly better if they did? No. Sometimes this does matter (Need for speed Underground Series) but there the gameplay largely is building and getting your 'custom dream car'
you can say that graphics do matter, but to say that he's wrong in saying "graphics arent the only thing that matters" is foolish. Just because thats been a major cause of the consoles doing that doesn't mean or imply that thats all thats been done. The processing power has also allowed developers to provide more immersive environments and to tell rich stories with the proper use of said graphics.
Consoles have also added network functionality, abilities to play movies and music, and some other gunk. I agree that that has been the biggest difference console to console, but there has been major complexity changes as well with regard to interface.
Look at a nintedo controller, 4 directions, 2 buttons. snes added 4 buttons... ok we're getting somewhere 64 added a analog controller which was quite innovative and a major change that was quickly embraced by other systems (ps dualshock-> ps2 dualshock, saturn released a new updated controller for nights, etc) nintedo added the rumble pak which then became integrated everywhere else game cube saw nintendo redesign the controller to be more obvious for use in terms of HCI and usability. i wont even waste time on the wii or the ds... nintendo has a large tradition of changing the controller and evolving the possibilities nearly everytime around. perhaps that is why they have had so much success. although i doubt id call '64 or GC much of a success aside from a handful of blockbuster titles i could count on my two hands alone comp'd to PS2 and xbox's array of hits.
if graphics were all that mattered then people wouldn't hack their xbox's so that they can play zsnes and mame games, and wouldnt buy xbox's for the sole purpose of doing that, as several people i know have. (i know several people who own less than 5 games for xbox, halo2 always being among them aside, and they use the xbox more for media playing and retro gaming than anything else)
as much as the PS3 isn't doing well right now, I could def consider getting one later downstream since i never got an xbox, and loading linux on it (you can find instructions for that anywhere, including from IBM) and running mythTV or wine/zsnes on it or what have you.
Yes but that argument could have been made about electric cars too.. the ev-1 anybody?
go rent "Who killed the electric Car" One of the largest guilty parties were the car makers themselves. Heck they were the ones who "confiscated" all of them and destroyed them.
"No. I have no debt and I am not interested in debt. I use money, and will continue to do so as long as it remains legal. "Credit" cards are badly misnamed: They are debt cards with the interesting ability to increase your debt position just by getting a day older."
Are you a politician because you do a good job of not answering any of the questions I actually ask you, or if you do you rephrase them to suit you for some other means. I didn't ask you how you use it, I said DO you use it. There is a large difference. The point is the same either way you use it.
I don't carry credit card debt or pay finance charges either, its called paying the bill every month in full. Ever tried renting a car without a credit card? Good luck. Personally I tend to doubt that you have zero credit cards. You never buy anything online? Or am I supposed to believe that you paypal everything and have always used a debit card online? Either way I'm sure you're going to have fun when you go to the bank for a homeloan and they look at your empty credit history. And if you retort that you financed your car instead to build credit history I will really laugh at you.
I have no debt, and I'm not interested in it either. I use money too, but I think that carrying around 1000's of dollars on me is pretty damn stupid. I'm not a big fan of writing checks constantly for small amounts and leaving that money in a checking account connected to a debit card where it will get zero interest is also pretty shortsighted too when it can be out earning interest.
I would say they are precisely named, they allow access via a card to a line of credit established with an institution. It can't be a debit card because you don't deposit money first. I don't have money sitting around with VISA/AMEX/MC that they are free to debit whenever a charge comes through. You can setup accounts to accompish this, but a credit is a credit card.
But I'm glad that you didn't focus on the point of what I said but instead on the minute detail of it being a "credit" card. Either way when the charge is made your location was just given up.
"I've never had a restaurant ask me my name, only what I wanted to eat. If they ever did make such an inquiry, I would be quite happy to leave before answering in detail any greater than my first name." Apparently you've never eaten at a restaurant then. Wow. Unlike you many of us go out and have to make reservations at restaurants where we occasionally have to give our name, or get asked for our name to reserve a table. Maybe its not your full legal name, but its your name and face nonetheless. But then again my money says you are again making the statement for effect and blatantly lying.
As for your response to the alcohol question it is not unrelated. The problem is that many places don't want to try and keep up with the vast array of different ID's being issued by different states. Instead they choose to keep up with the state they are located in and familiar with and 'discriminate' against others. If there were a national ID, then they wouldn't have to keep up with knowledge of the state ID's now would they. Instead of having to memorize 5 or more different forms for 50 states with several of which constantly changing you have one national standard that they can always accept.
"RFID range is sufficient to talk to the cash register when you make a purchase, to talk to the teller when you go to a bank, to talk to the terminal when you apply for federally or state issued anything, to talk to the booth when you go through a toll station. It is short, but that's because it doesn't need to be long." Ok so you aren't disagreeing with what I said apparently and just wanted to ramble on? The point is that you are so close to the people who could be 'reading your RFID' that you aren't giving away your location more than you are by physically being there. If you are at a cash register I'm pretty sure the person at the register can see you.
my last question is the heck modded up for being informative? You said nothing informative, and you didn't answer any of the questions you were asked.
and how much of a ridiculous surcharge are we going to have to pay for this? as it is the cable companies pretty much suck. Oh you want to have the DVR from us and the channel guide? you need digital cable... What does digital cable give me? basically just duplicates of every channel you already get and couple of extra ones that you will never ever watch. and some free on demand that has absolutely nothing you'll ever want to watch on it. weee open up your wallets
why not make a hybrid intelligent car... by this logic it should improve even further..
All jokes aside while this is semi informitive it is also semi obvious and stupid, not to mention short sighted. The same intelligence could be utilized by the hybrids and they would make similar benefits.
Secondly its about as impractical as it gets. If you try driving like that in the city people will zip around you, and cut you off. Third, I question where this was performed. In a traffic light intensive city it really doesn't matter what you do, you're going to constantly hit red lights, and if you don't step on the gas when you get a green you might get more than just honks eventually.
Do you frequently use a credit card? Because guess what, you could be tracked from that as well. Ever use your real name at a restaurant? Oh crud they could track you there too. This is stupid. RFID range from my understanding is not that large, and frankly having a National ID program would mean that everytime I travel to other states they can't refuse to sell my alcohol because they don't like the fact that I have an out of state ID. I'm 24 years old, and I by no means like like I'm possibly younger than 21. I walk into a liquor store in Texas where despite the signs on the door that "consumption of alcohol on the premises is illegal" they are handing out tequila samples. Ok they don't seem to care about that law.. I get inline to try and buy a bottle, they ask for me ID. I show them my ID (at the time a Massachusetts ID), and they frown, "sorry we don't accept out of state ID's" Should I report them for this stupidity? Probably, but it wouldn't happen if we had a national ID.
Secondly it would be a lot easier to carry around then your SS card and birth certificate everytime you want to say go to canada (although i guess we need passports for that now) or have to deal with paperwork whenever you get a job. I'm not in love with the RFID thing, but if they could drop that I'd be pretty happy. I'm quite sick and tired of places not accepting out of state ID's.
Your argument is horribly invalid. There was no doubt or question that the acts he committed were crimes in both countries. The companies whose rights he violated don't happen to live in the US, they are and always have been in the US. Copyright Law is different from criminal law anyhow, stop trying to draw comparisons. International IP Laws (copyright and patent) are both extremely important, think about the billions of dollars worth of pirated software that float around in places like Russia, Indonesia, and Asia. Everything you buy is charging you more to reflect that.
This is not a case where the australian guy sent something to someone who "coincidentally" was somewhere where it was illegal, it was something that both illegal in his country and the other, and he knew exactly where it was occurring.
Your example would be better if he sent the cartoon from China, or from some other country where the act was already illegal.
You make it sound as if it was "by chance" that his work landed in the US.
Secondly, he is prosecuted here because Copyright violations while carrying criminal penalties don't send the money to the government, they send the money to the company you wronged. Those bringing suit determine the venue. If he had hacked into bank of america, would BOA have to go to Australia to sue him? no, they'd sue him here where he did the damage.
You can dislike the politics, but what sickens me is how you people try to use that stuff to make an excuse for the fact that he got caught breaking the law. You don't like the law? Too bad, you go break it if you like but don't whine when you get caught. If he didn't engage in the activities he was involved in he wouldn't be in any trouble now would he?
Stop dragging in the fact that YOU don't like copyright law into the proper and legal enforcement of it. This isn't the RIAA here, they arent issuing blanket statements to unknown john doe's around the world who may or may not have committed the offense.
Like, dislike or hate the copyright laws, they are what they are. Much like most other laws. You want to change them, go ahead I'm with you. But stop trying to make this about the Government over stepping its boundries trying to own everyone and bullying people when thats not the issue.
The issue is simple. You do the crime and get caught, you do the time. What's worse is that this wasn't just john doe at home downloading and sharing stuff. This was organized crime with deliberate intent, and yet you defend him.
Next you people are going to start defending the mob, after all killing people you don't like, stealing money, and beating people up for money should be legal too right?
the only problem is laziness on the ends of programmers. it's the age old adage now: CD killed the Algorithm Once space wasn't scarce the whole art of and process of optimization and minimizing sizes went out the door. We have space so lets waste it with lots of content that doesn't add anything to gameplay but looks nice. There is no way that you can convince me that the 9 gigs or whatever on a dual layer DVD isn't enough room to put in the content they need.
I'd venture that instead the problem is bloating and the fact that the industry as a whole does this and forces the developers to do so is also notable. There are plenty of alternatives they could utilize. Not the least of which is that whole "multiple disc" thing.
The funniest thing is that Microsoft is essentially saying "things can't rely on you having a harddrive, and therefore nothing will ever utilize it, so all its going to do is prevent you from having a bajillion memory cards." Great design. Didn't even the original Xbox have a built in hard drive?
If the CD killed the algorithm, the DVD dug up its grave, defiled it, smacked it around and chopped into a several million pieces. And HDDVD / bluray is still deciding which nuclear warhead it wants to use.
Wow, talk about a liar.. someone please mod her down
"I'm not a criminal or an anarcharist. I am one of the twenty five million Americans who have been arrested for possession of herbal intoxicant cannibus and can point out many instances of having suffered discrimination as a result." AKA I'm a socialistic hippie who thinks that the law only applies when it benefits me. Oh I shot someone, well I dont like him and I dont like that law so I'm not a murderer. yeah right
"Copying it, using it, modifing it is not a crime." Actually it is. Just because you are a potsmoking hippie who thinks the laws are bad doesn't mean they aren't laws.
next you are going to tell me shooting people isn't a crime perhaps?
"I don't steal" See above, you admit to stealing in your post outright. I bet you'd call it stealing if someone stole your bag of pot.
"I am now unfairly discriminated against" how are you unfairly discriminated against? You broke a law, you got caught, you were convicted of a felony and now you have to acknowledge that fact when you try to find work. The only unfair thing about it is that you don't like it.
"This experience has led me to real-word realization that most of what passes for law is just bullshit designed to keep someone rich. And that especially applies to any law related to software." umm maybe i'm confused but how does being arrestd for possession of marijuana have anything to do with laws about keeping someone rich or software. If anything it prevents people from getting rich from selling the stuff.
"I do copy software. I do it at work if it can improve my personal productivity. I am used to my text editor and my user interface configuration. Ditto my graphics image processing software. I'm not going to learn yours. If my company won't buy it and install it for my use, then I do it myself. I'm too old and worldwise to give a shit about whether someone has a problem with this. I don't care." Actually it sounds like you aren't worldwise at all. You are just too old and too stubbornly arrogant and self important to realize that you are a moron. Your text editor, hmm lemme guess Microsoft Word, if you want it and they wont pay then buy your own copy or deal with it like everyone else at work who wants their editor. Oh you don't like your "user interface configuration" whatever the hell that means, so buy one.
while we are at it, can i have your name so i can make sure I never hire you? thanks that'd be great
Whatever you want to believe about it, and frankly the acceptable use policy is rather flaky, there is one underlying problem
suspension from school from viewing a website that isn't illegal for you to access is nuts.
can you say overkill?
here's a better idea, issue a warning, then revoke their school computer privilages.
problem solved, all without having to suspend people and prevent them from getting the education you have no right to take away from them.
reminds of how we solve lots of our problems, by not solving them at all.
how many drunk drivers who have been convicted and lose their license end up in another drunk driving incident? far too many
IANAL but I have a basic grasp of the term PRIOR ART
GDB, and various debuggers and debuggers such as Visual Studios have zero concerns for patent violations...
they have existed in products since long before the patents date. so even if they were somehow construed to be violating it, if the holders of the patent sued them for violation microsoft or whoever would hire the cheapest shittiest lawyer they could and say lets go to court. Hand them a copy of any version that existed prior to the file or claimed "invention" date (we really need to get towards a first to file system here in usa) and say guess what we have prior art and your patent is invalid and we want legal damages for you wasting our time.
the real problem is that in many ways they are getting away with patenting an algorithm, and as a whole software patents are seeming more and more absurd. but till then i guess i'll get a couple of my own right?
So according to this why can't I start a new company called softexchage. Softexchange now declared that it will collect all royalties for using any software of any kind. If you'd like to collect your share of the royalties you have to call me at home on my one telephone line or provide in writing a notorized copy of your declaration of ownership of material, and then for a small (large) annual fee you can collect some random amount of money that I decide to give you.
And this is legal how? oh right because our government and copyright office suck. They basically just said "ok all copyrights you hold on any musical works have just been transferred to riaa's new company, and they get it for free. And to enable them to continue to get rich off your work if you want the money that you should be getting you have to pay them for it.
What next create a sham company to collect all of our paychecks and if I want my paycheck I have to pay said company to receive it? I feel like the government has far overstepped its bounds on this one.
I think you forget that A. Patents expire. B. No one is saying Verizon's competition should be shut down. The competition either needs to find or create another way to solve the problem that avoids the patent, license it, or invalidate the patent (which I'm hoping will instead happen) C. You have every right not to license a patent because you would want the rights to exclusively do it yourself. Apple doesn't license the Macintosh to be made by others. Should they be forced to do so ending their monopoly?
How do you determine what a reasonable amount is? namely the 'bit of interest'? Patents do encourage the sharing of ideas, but not necessarily profiting off of them and selling them as your own. In many addmitted ways patents do provide limited and controlled monopolies.
And then of course there is patenting for defense purposes...
A patent is a set of exclusive rights granted by a state to a patentee (the inventor or assignee) for a fixed period of time in exchange for the regulated, public disclosure of certain details of a device, method, process or composition of matter (substance) (known as an invention) which is new, inventive, and useful or industrially applicable. Modern patents include a set of claims which provide the basis for determining the exclusive rights. The way the exclusive rights are determined is subject to applicable laws.
The exclusive right granted to a patentee in most countries is the right to prevent or exclude others from making, using, selling, offering to sell or importing the claimed invention. The rights given to the patentee do not include the right to make, use, or sell the invention themselves. The patentee may have to comply with other laws and regulations to make use of the claimed invention. So, for example, a pharmaceutical company may obtain a patent on a new drug but will be unable to market the drug without regulatory approval, or an inventor may patent an improvement to a particular type of laser, but be unable to make or sell the new design without a license from the owner of an earlier broader patent covering lasers of that type.
as much as I hate MS, that is absurd. The EU is definately overstepping when it decided how many of the patents are "innovative" if they werent innovative then they shouldnt be granted and should be nullified. If thats the way the EU is going to treat businesses watch as people stop doing business with them. Whenever the EU decides you are being too profitable you are saying they have the right to tell youwhat to do?
not correct at all. frankly they dont need to governments right to charge anything. if the government didnt exist they would charge in some other means. secondly they dont have to charge in the EU's currency either. And guess what microsoft doesn't have to sell or give you their products either. and you don't have to buy them.
Do you even understand how capitalism works? whats more sad is that people think your claims are insightful when they are shortsided, and overly simplified.
what about next week when the EU decides that you are no longer allowed to charge more than 1 penny for your work. have they over stepped their bounds yet? if you dont think so, then I think you either dont understand rights, or you are a moron and i'd like to do business with you so i can abuse the fact that you don't understand rights at all.
I despire MS, but the EU can definately overstep their bounds and arguably doing it already.
as much as I hate to say it, monopolies arent illegal. monopolistic practices are. The government has no right and would set a far worse precedent enforing licensing by a court determined cost. That would be the absolute worst thing that could possibly happen. Next thing you know based on that precedent judges through the land will be licensing patents for people against their will without their knowledge for whatever price they determine. A patent most fundamentally grants you the right to determine the fate usage and licensing of your patent. You have every right to refuse to license it to people whether or not you plan on doing any with it.
to be honest im surprised big oil hasnt teamed up with the auto industry to patent everything under the sun involving electric cars and then refuse to license it to anyone so that they can continue to avoid the electric car thing (watch 'who killed the electric car')
I really hate patent trolls, and I really side on vonage with this whole thing... but irregardless you cant just say fuck it they have all the control make them license everything.... and sadly the folks it will end up hurting the most is the FOSS community.. now commercial groups will have the means to forcibly pay for license to profit off Open source development.
the one and only problem here is the flock of moronic idiots who are in control of the USPTO... which reminds me, I wonder if they are hiring, it would probably be fun to do nothing and grant patents simply because i felt like it.
Aside from the fact that this guy is an asshat, who refuses to place any of the responsibility on parents (why are the kids out at a free hotspot anyway shouldnt they be in school or at home, and why do they have laptops anyhow...)
shouldn't he be busy trying to come up with lame excuses as to why they should sue linux or someone else? I'm seriously saying this but honestly what does SCO actually do.. and how does this guy starting random flames have anything to do with it.
personally I think that this guy, and SCO and attempts to quash free hotspots should be made illegal
and how does he know thats where 'kids' watch porn all day, is he sitting there watching with them? I'm pretty sure the bulk of porn watching doesn't happen in public places just a hunch.
The real problem isn't so much that they aren't developing for Firefox, it's that they aren't developing to the accepted W3C standards, and validating their html/source/whatever. IE allows you to do things that are otherwise illegal according to the standards. Firefox and many other browsers force you to adhere to those standards... Heck that's the point of standards in the first place.
web developers, publicly traded companies, and etc should be held accountable to have equally accessible web-content that is not browser dependent.
The reality is that the user-agent should not be a factor in anything working. If you have an MP3 you expect any reasonable MP3 player to be able to play it... If you have a website you expect any web browser should be able to 'play' it as well.
but how come you never hear the same jokes thrown at judges, who often engage in just as many if not more deplorable acts, and further more are lawyers?
I for one find it appalling that judges continue to inject their personal opinion into what should be enforced, when that is not their job. They don't like a law they should do what everyone else does and try to get it changed; until then they enforce it just like we have to obey it. Why is that so hard?
let's get smart and apply this 'technology' to some other places..
1. To the fridge or mini-fridge; for your new diet when you walk towards it, it starts scuttling around your house forcing you to chase it down before you get your grub on... The inevitable damage that it causes to the walls and appliances it bumps into and destroys is actually a feature not a bug; as the construction labor will help burn additional calories
2. for the evercrack/wow fiend in your life: mount his/her computer on it and make it take a path that leads him/her to sunlight outside on the little chase. comes with a warning label that their retinas may instantly melt..
3. to your wallet so that when you get home you have to run around and think before you buy crap you don't need on tv
4. to your car keys on weekend nights... if you approach them and you are drunk you'll have to catch them first if you want to drive. and the exercise may do some good to jumpstart your metabolism.
5. why cant we apply this to some random dog toy that fido can chase around.. it would have to be made out of that same stuff the unbreakable rulers are made of... but preferably stronger since those tend to break a whole lot.
6. and last but least, the practical jokers model, with adhesive, so you can stick whatever it is you need to put on it to annoy someone with.
thanks for orders operators are standing by at 555-5555 dont be alarmed if they cant pick up right away... there phones runa round the office whenever they ring!
Slashdot Mirror
"Our wonderful nanny state"
which state are you talking about, the odd's that I live in your's are only 1 in 50, and I never even said I live in the US, (although I do and am a proud US citizen)
And it's very possible to stop supporting a line of cars, you go bankrupt.
"That you think it would need to be mandatory for manufacturers to produce a certain quota of electric cars regardless of actual market demand shows that you if anything support this sort of overregulation."
No I dont, AND I NEVER SAID I DID. That was the legislation that was passed in california, I'm not spouting opinion, I'm correcting you're errors you moron. YOU obviously didnt see the movie.
California passed a regulation NOT ME, that stated as of year XXXX you had to offer/sell X% electric cars. The automakers didnt like this for a myriad of reasons, and in order to shoot down that argument they had to prove that either the car wasnt feasible and that there was no demand. The problem was the car worked, and there was demand. The only to to eliminate demand was to A. stop selling them. B. halt development. C. discredit them. and D. round up and destroy all the cars.
magically all demand is gone.
I haven't offered my opinion on whether it should be mandatory in any way shape or form, because frankly while I think it should be mandatory my civil liberties I enjoy tell me that I can't impose that because damned if i want someone imposing something like that on me... "For every 1000 lines of propietary code you write you must write 1 free one..."
Big thanks for not reading my post, not reading the article, and not reading or looking up any thing relevant to the discussion before responding to me with the same stupid thing you responded with the first time.
The whole point of what the auto makers were doing was to ELIMINATE DEMAND because it existed.
That you think i said that demonstrates that you dont even read the posts you respond to.
But to be honest I think there should be some regulation. If you want to drive a car that gets 10 miles a gallon you should get slapped in the head. I cant charge them money since they already pay it, but if you do you definately get ZERO pity points when you complain about expensive gas and how you can't pay your bills.
If there was a gas shortage however then i would go ahead and say lets start luxury taxing the morons. Don't get me wrong if you drive a hummer or a suburban and aren't hauling a ton of shit around I think you are a wasteful moron. But you have the right to be one, and spend your money as you wish. I hate saying that but i like my rights and i'm not giving them up to tell someone else how to be responsible.
our society had nothing to do with the death of the Ev-1. If i didnt comment on this post i would mod you down for being stupid. Pay for damages, what damages? There was nothing wrong with it other than that people liked it. The fact that they existed meant that they could be made and that meant that the companies couldnt say it was infeasible and would have to sell 20% electric cars. they didnt want to do that, so they yanked them. They literally had to pry them from the owners. And then despite people wanting to buy out their EV-1's they were all destroyed.
I really don't see how you can connect our admittedly litigious society to this one.
I'm guessing you either
a. work for the auto industry
b. didn't see the movie or do any homework in terms of reading about what you are trying to talk about
nope, not really
yes for the past 20 years its been a case of CD killed the algorithm and all thats mattered has been graphics. but that doesn't make it or the games good or better.
ever play QBclub for N64 (circa 98-00)? plays miserably, but looks great.
instead play NFL '99 for PS1 from around the same time period
it doesn't look nearly as good, but it plays phenomanlly better.
The problem is that somewhere along the way gamers were somehow led to believe that graphics were one of the most important pieces of a game and of gameplay when by definition they dont matter nearly as much.
A shitty game that has amazing graphics is still a shitty game.
I don't care how great the physics are for the individual blades of grass and for the ceiling fans that actually swing around when you jump into them in Halo2/HL2 etc that doesn't add to the gameplay.
why have emulators allowing us to play classic atari, nintendo, snes, and sega games been so prevalent? because they were good games and the graphics weren't the major issue.
Yes used properly they can be amazing (ff7 made excellent use of its extra space, xenosaga does too) and even more modern things like Devil May Cry and God of War etc.
Heck I still play GTA2 because its a very fun game to play, i dont care that its overhead and essentially 2D, or that the cars don't like ultra lifelike. Who gives a crap, would it make the game play significantly better if they did? No. Sometimes this does matter (Need for speed Underground Series) but there the gameplay largely is building and getting your 'custom dream car'
you can say that graphics do matter, but to say that he's wrong in saying "graphics arent the only thing that matters" is foolish. Just because thats been a major cause of the consoles doing that doesn't mean or imply that thats all thats been done. The processing power has also allowed developers to provide more immersive environments and to tell rich stories with the proper use of said graphics.
Consoles have also added network functionality, abilities to play movies and music, and some other gunk. I agree that that has been the biggest difference console to console, but there has been major complexity changes as well with regard to interface.
Look at a nintedo controller, 4 directions, 2 buttons.
snes added 4 buttons... ok we're getting somewhere
64 added a analog controller which was quite innovative and a major change that was quickly embraced by other systems (ps dualshock-> ps2 dualshock, saturn released a new updated controller for nights, etc)
nintedo added the rumble pak which then became integrated everywhere else
game cube saw nintendo redesign the controller to be more obvious for use in terms of HCI and usability.
i wont even waste time on the wii or the ds...
nintendo has a large tradition of changing the controller and evolving the possibilities nearly everytime around. perhaps that is why they have had so much success. although i doubt id call '64 or GC much of a success aside from a handful of blockbuster titles i could count on my two hands alone comp'd to PS2 and xbox's array of hits.
if graphics were all that mattered then people wouldn't hack their xbox's so that they can play zsnes and mame games, and wouldnt buy xbox's for the sole purpose of doing that, as several people i know have. (i know several people who own less than 5 games for xbox, halo2 always being among them aside, and they use the xbox more for media playing and retro gaming than anything else)
as much as the PS3 isn't doing well right now, I could def consider getting one later downstream since i never got an xbox, and loading linux on it (you can find instructions for that anywhere, including from IBM) and running mythTV or wine/zsnes on it or what have you.
Yes but that argument could have been made about electric cars too.. the ev-1 anybody? go rent "Who killed the electric Car" One of the largest guilty parties were the car makers themselves. Heck they were the ones who "confiscated" all of them and destroyed them.
"No. I have no debt and I am not interested in debt. I use money, and will continue to do so as long as it remains legal. "Credit" cards are badly misnamed: They are debt cards with the interesting ability to increase your debt position just by getting a day older."
Are you a politician because you do a good job of not answering any of the questions I actually ask you, or if you do you rephrase them to suit you for some other means. I didn't ask you how you use it, I said DO you use it. There is a large difference. The point is the same either way you use it.
I don't carry credit card debt or pay finance charges either, its called paying the bill every month in full. Ever tried renting a car without a credit card? Good luck. Personally I tend to doubt that you have zero credit cards. You never buy anything online? Or am I supposed to believe that you paypal everything and have always used a debit card online? Either way I'm sure you're going to have fun when you go to the bank for a homeloan and they look at your empty credit history. And if you retort that you financed your car instead to build credit history I will really laugh at you.
I have no debt, and I'm not interested in it either. I use money too, but I think that carrying around 1000's of dollars on me is pretty damn stupid. I'm not a big fan of writing checks constantly for small amounts and leaving that money in a checking account connected to a debit card where it will get zero interest is also pretty shortsighted too when it can be out earning interest.
I would say they are precisely named, they allow access via a card to a line of credit established with an institution. It can't be a debit card because you don't deposit money first. I don't have money sitting around with VISA/AMEX/MC that they are free to debit whenever a charge comes through. You can setup accounts to accompish this, but a credit is a credit card.
But I'm glad that you didn't focus on the point of what I said but instead on the minute detail of it being a "credit" card. Either way when the charge is made your location was just given up.
"I've never had a restaurant ask me my name, only what I wanted to eat. If they ever did make such an inquiry, I would be quite happy to leave before answering in detail any greater than my first name."
Apparently you've never eaten at a restaurant then. Wow. Unlike you many of us go out and have to make reservations at restaurants where we occasionally have to give our name, or get asked for our name to reserve a table. Maybe its not your full legal name, but its your name and face nonetheless. But then again my money says you are again making the statement for effect and blatantly lying.
As for your response to the alcohol question it is not unrelated. The problem is that many places don't want to try and keep up with the vast array of different ID's being issued by different states. Instead they choose to keep up with the state they are located in and familiar with and 'discriminate' against others. If there were a national ID, then they wouldn't have to keep up with knowledge of the state ID's now would they. Instead of having to memorize 5 or more different forms for 50 states with several of which constantly changing you have one national standard that they can always accept.
"RFID range is sufficient to talk to the cash register when you make a purchase, to talk to the teller when you go to a bank, to talk to the terminal when you apply for federally or state issued anything, to talk to the booth when you go through a toll station. It is short, but that's because it doesn't need to be long."
Ok so you aren't disagreeing with what I said apparently and just wanted to ramble on? The point is that you are so close to the people who could be 'reading your RFID' that you aren't giving away your location more than you are by physically being there. If you are at a cash register I'm pretty sure the person at the register can see you.
my last question is the heck modded up for being informative? You said nothing informative, and you didn't answer any of the questions you were asked.
and how much of a ridiculous surcharge are we going to have to pay for this? as it is the cable companies pretty much suck. Oh you want to have the DVR from us and the channel guide? you need digital cable... What does digital cable give me? basically just duplicates of every channel you already get and couple of extra ones that you will never ever watch. and some free on demand that has absolutely nothing you'll ever want to watch on it. weee open up your wallets
why not make a hybrid intelligent car... by this logic it should improve even further.. All jokes aside while this is semi informitive it is also semi obvious and stupid, not to mention short sighted. The same intelligence could be utilized by the hybrids and they would make similar benefits. Secondly its about as impractical as it gets. If you try driving like that in the city people will zip around you, and cut you off. Third, I question where this was performed. In a traffic light intensive city it really doesn't matter what you do, you're going to constantly hit red lights, and if you don't step on the gas when you get a green you might get more than just honks eventually.
Do you frequently use a credit card? Because guess what, you could be tracked from that as well. Ever use your real name at a restaurant? Oh crud they could track you there too. This is stupid. RFID range from my understanding is not that large, and frankly having a National ID program would mean that everytime I travel to other states they can't refuse to sell my alcohol because they don't like the fact that I have an out of state ID.
I'm 24 years old, and I by no means like like I'm possibly younger than 21. I walk into a liquor store in Texas where despite the signs on the door that "consumption of alcohol on the premises is illegal" they are handing out tequila samples. Ok they don't seem to care about that law.. I get inline to try and buy a bottle, they ask for me ID. I show them my ID (at the time a Massachusetts ID), and they frown, "sorry we don't accept out of state ID's" Should I report them for this stupidity? Probably, but it wouldn't happen if we had a national ID.
Secondly it would be a lot easier to carry around then your SS card and birth certificate everytime you want to say go to canada (although i guess we need passports for that now) or have to deal with paperwork whenever you get a job. I'm not in love with the RFID thing, but if they could drop that I'd be pretty happy. I'm quite sick and tired of places not accepting out of state ID's.
Your argument is horribly invalid. There was no doubt or question that the acts he committed were crimes in both countries. The companies whose rights he violated don't happen to live in the US, they are and always have been in the US. Copyright Law is different from criminal law anyhow, stop trying to draw comparisons. International IP Laws (copyright and patent) are both extremely important, think about the billions of dollars worth of pirated software that float around in places like Russia, Indonesia, and Asia. Everything you buy is charging you more to reflect that.
This is not a case where the australian guy sent something to someone who "coincidentally" was somewhere where it was illegal, it was something that both illegal in his country and the other, and he knew exactly where it was occurring.
Your example would be better if he sent the cartoon from China, or from some other country where the act was already illegal.
You make it sound as if it was "by chance" that his work landed in the US.
Secondly, he is prosecuted here because Copyright violations while carrying criminal penalties don't send the money to the government, they send the money to the company you wronged. Those bringing suit determine the venue. If he had hacked into bank of america, would BOA have to go to Australia to sue him? no, they'd sue him here where he did the damage.
You can dislike the politics, but what sickens me is how you people try to use that stuff to make an excuse for the fact that he got caught breaking the law. You don't like the law? Too bad, you go break it if you like but don't whine when you get caught. If he didn't engage in the activities he was involved in he wouldn't be in any trouble now would he?
Stop dragging in the fact that YOU don't like copyright law into the proper and legal enforcement of it. This isn't the RIAA here, they arent issuing blanket statements to unknown john doe's around the world who may or may not have committed the offense.
Like, dislike or hate the copyright laws, they are what they are. Much like most other laws. You want to change them, go ahead I'm with you. But stop trying to make this about the Government over stepping its boundries trying to own everyone and bullying people when thats not the issue.
The issue is simple. You do the crime and get caught, you do the time.
What's worse is that this wasn't just john doe at home downloading and sharing stuff. This was organized crime with deliberate intent, and yet you defend him.
Next you people are going to start defending the mob, after all killing people you don't like, stealing money, and beating people up for money should be legal too right?
the only problem is laziness on the ends of programmers. it's the age old adage now: CD killed the Algorithm
Once space wasn't scarce the whole art of and process of optimization and minimizing sizes went out the door. We have space so lets waste it with lots of content that doesn't add anything to gameplay but looks nice. There is no way that you can convince me that the 9 gigs or whatever on a dual layer DVD isn't enough room to put in the content they need.
I'd venture that instead the problem is bloating and the fact that the industry as a whole does this and forces the developers to do so is also notable. There are plenty of alternatives they could utilize. Not the least of which is that whole "multiple disc" thing.
The funniest thing is that Microsoft is essentially saying "things can't rely on you having a harddrive, and therefore nothing will ever utilize it, so all its going to do is prevent you from having a bajillion memory cards." Great design. Didn't even the original Xbox have a built in hard drive?
If the CD killed the algorithm, the DVD dug up its grave, defiled it, smacked it around and chopped into a several million pieces. And HDDVD / bluray is still deciding which nuclear warhead it wants to use.
Wow, talk about a liar.. someone please mod her down
"I'm not a criminal or an anarcharist. I am one of the twenty five million Americans who have been arrested for possession of herbal intoxicant cannibus and can point out many instances of having suffered discrimination as a result."
AKA I'm a socialistic hippie who thinks that the law only applies when it benefits me. Oh I shot someone, well I dont like him and I dont like that law so I'm not a murderer. yeah right
"Copying it, using it, modifing it is not a crime." Actually it is. Just because you are a potsmoking hippie who thinks the laws are bad doesn't mean they aren't laws.
next you are going to tell me shooting people isn't a crime perhaps?
"I don't steal" See above, you admit to stealing in your post outright. I bet you'd call it stealing if someone stole your bag of pot.
"I am now unfairly discriminated against" how are you unfairly discriminated against? You broke a law, you got caught, you were convicted of a felony and now you have to acknowledge that fact when you try to find work. The only unfair thing about it is that you don't like it.
"This experience has led me to real-word realization that most of what passes for law is just bullshit designed to keep someone rich. And that especially applies to any law related to software."
umm maybe i'm confused but how does being arrestd for possession of marijuana have anything to do with laws about keeping someone rich or software. If anything it prevents people from getting rich from selling the stuff.
"I do copy software. I do it at work if it can improve my personal productivity. I am used to my text editor and my user interface configuration. Ditto my graphics image processing software. I'm not going to learn yours. If my company won't buy it and install it for my use, then I do it myself. I'm too old and worldwise to give a shit about whether someone has a problem with this. I don't care."
Actually it sounds like you aren't worldwise at all. You are just too old and too stubbornly arrogant and self important to realize that you are a moron. Your text editor, hmm lemme guess Microsoft Word, if you want it and they wont pay then buy your own copy or deal with it like everyone else at work who wants their editor. Oh you don't like your "user interface configuration" whatever the hell that means, so buy one.
while we are at it, can i have your name so i can make sure I never hire you? thanks that'd be great
Whatever you want to believe about it, and frankly the acceptable use policy is rather flaky, there is one underlying problem suspension from school from viewing a website that isn't illegal for you to access is nuts. can you say overkill? here's a better idea, issue a warning, then revoke their school computer privilages. problem solved, all without having to suspend people and prevent them from getting the education you have no right to take away from them. reminds of how we solve lots of our problems, by not solving them at all. how many drunk drivers who have been convicted and lose their license end up in another drunk driving incident? far too many
IANAL but I have a basic grasp of the term PRIOR ART GDB, and various debuggers and debuggers such as Visual Studios have zero concerns for patent violations... they have existed in products since long before the patents date. so even if they were somehow construed to be violating it, if the holders of the patent sued them for violation microsoft or whoever would hire the cheapest shittiest lawyer they could and say lets go to court. Hand them a copy of any version that existed prior to the file or claimed "invention" date (we really need to get towards a first to file system here in usa) and say guess what we have prior art and your patent is invalid and we want legal damages for you wasting our time. the real problem is that in many ways they are getting away with patenting an algorithm, and as a whole software patents are seeming more and more absurd. but till then i guess i'll get a couple of my own right?
how does sodomy have anything at all to do with this?
So according to this why can't I start a new company called softexchage. Softexchange now declared that it will collect all royalties for using any software of any kind. If you'd like to collect your share of the royalties you have to call me at home on my one telephone line or provide in writing a notorized copy of your declaration of ownership of material, and then for a small (large) annual fee you can collect some random amount of money that I decide to give you. And this is legal how? oh right because our government and copyright office suck. They basically just said "ok all copyrights you hold on any musical works have just been transferred to riaa's new company, and they get it for free. And to enable them to continue to get rich off your work if you want the money that you should be getting you have to pay them for it. What next create a sham company to collect all of our paychecks and if I want my paycheck I have to pay said company to receive it? I feel like the government has far overstepped its bounds on this one.
I think you forget that
A. Patents expire.
B. No one is saying Verizon's competition should be shut down. The competition either needs to find or create another way to solve the problem that avoids the patent, license it, or invalidate the patent (which I'm hoping will instead happen)
C. You have every right not to license a patent because you would want the rights to exclusively do it yourself. Apple doesn't license the Macintosh to be made by others. Should they be forced to do so ending their monopoly?
How do you determine what a reasonable amount is? namely the 'bit of interest'? Patents do encourage the sharing of ideas, but not necessarily profiting off of them and selling them as your own. In many addmitted ways patents do provide limited and controlled monopolies.
And then of course there is patenting for defense purposes...
check out what wikipedia has to say: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent
A patent is a set of exclusive rights granted by a state to a patentee (the inventor or assignee) for a fixed period of time in exchange for the regulated, public disclosure of certain details of a device, method, process or composition of matter (substance) (known as an invention) which is new, inventive, and useful or industrially applicable. Modern patents include a set of claims which provide the basis for determining the exclusive rights. The way the exclusive rights are determined is subject to applicable laws.
The exclusive right granted to a patentee in most countries is the right to prevent or exclude others from making, using, selling, offering to sell or importing the claimed invention. The rights given to the patentee do not include the right to make, use, or sell the invention themselves. The patentee may have to comply with other laws and regulations to make use of the claimed invention. So, for example, a pharmaceutical company may obtain a patent on a new drug but will be unable to market the drug without regulatory approval, or an inventor may patent an improvement to a particular type of laser, but be unable to make or sell the new design without a license from the owner of an earlier broader patent covering lasers of that type.
as much as I hate MS, that is absurd. The EU is definately overstepping when it decided how many of the patents are "innovative" if they werent innovative then they shouldnt be granted and should be nullified. If thats the way the EU is going to treat businesses watch as people stop doing business with them. Whenever the EU decides you are being too profitable you are saying they have the right to tell youwhat to do?
not correct at all. frankly they dont need to governments right to charge anything. if the government didnt exist they would charge in some other means. secondly they dont have to charge in the EU's currency either. And guess what microsoft doesn't have to sell or give you their products either. and you don't have to buy them.
Do you even understand how capitalism works?
whats more sad is that people think your claims are insightful when they are shortsided, and overly simplified.
what about next week when the EU decides that you are no longer allowed to charge more than 1 penny for your work. have they over stepped their bounds yet? if you dont think so, then I think you either dont understand rights, or you are a moron and i'd like to do business with you so i can abuse the fact that you don't understand rights at all.
I despire MS, but the EU can definately overstep their bounds and arguably doing it already.
as much as I hate to say it, monopolies arent illegal. monopolistic practices are. The government has no right and would set a far worse precedent enforing licensing by a court determined cost. That would be the absolute worst thing that could possibly happen. Next thing you know based on that precedent judges through the land will be licensing patents for people against their will without their knowledge for whatever price they determine. A patent most fundamentally grants you the right to determine the fate usage and licensing of your patent. You have every right to refuse to license it to people whether or not you plan on doing any with it.
to be honest im surprised big oil hasnt teamed up with the auto industry to patent everything under the sun involving electric cars and then refuse to license it to anyone so that they can continue to avoid the electric car thing (watch 'who killed the electric car')
I really hate patent trolls, and I really side on vonage with this whole thing... but irregardless you cant just say fuck it they have all the control make them license everything.... and sadly the folks it will end up hurting the most is the FOSS community.. now commercial groups will have the means to forcibly pay for license to profit off Open source development.
the one and only problem here is the flock of moronic idiots who are in control of the USPTO... which reminds me, I wonder if they are hiring, it would probably be fun to do nothing and grant patents simply because i felt like it.
SO? 1 out of 5 dentists still think chewing sugarless gum after meals isn't a good idea... and that's 20 percent.
Aside from the fact that this guy is an asshat, who refuses to place any of the responsibility on parents (why are the kids out at a free hotspot anyway shouldnt they be in school or at home, and why do they have laptops anyhow...)
shouldn't he be busy trying to come up with lame excuses as to why they should sue linux or someone else? I'm seriously saying this but honestly what does SCO actually do.. and how does this guy starting random flames have anything to do with it.
personally I think that this guy, and SCO and attempts to quash free hotspots should be made illegal
and how does he know thats where 'kids' watch porn all day, is he sitting there watching with them?
I'm pretty sure the bulk of porn watching doesn't happen in public places just a hunch.
The real problem isn't so much that they aren't developing for Firefox, it's that they aren't developing to the accepted W3C standards, and validating their html/source/whatever. IE allows you to do things that are otherwise illegal according to the standards. Firefox and many other browsers force you to adhere to those standards... Heck that's the point of standards in the first place.
web developers, publicly traded companies, and etc should be held accountable to have equally accessible web-content that is not browser dependent.
The reality is that the user-agent should not be a factor in anything working. If you have an MP3 you expect any reasonable MP3 player to be able to play it... If you have a website you expect any web browser should be able to 'play' it as well.
or were the browser wars as interesting as the whole y2k deal was..
but how come you never hear the same jokes thrown at judges, who often engage in just as many if not more deplorable acts, and further more are lawyers?
I for one find it appalling that judges continue to inject their personal opinion into what should be enforced, when that is not their job. They don't like a law they should do what everyone else does and try to get it changed; until then they enforce it just like we have to obey it. Why is that so hard?
let's get smart and apply this 'technology' to some other places..
1. To the fridge or mini-fridge; for your new diet when you walk towards it, it starts scuttling around your house forcing you to chase it down before you get your grub on... The inevitable damage that it causes to the walls and appliances it bumps into and destroys is actually a feature not a bug; as the construction labor will help burn additional calories
2. for the evercrack/wow fiend in your life: mount his/her computer on it and make it take a path that leads him/her to sunlight outside on the little chase. comes with a warning label that their retinas may instantly melt..
3. to your wallet so that when you get home you have to run around and think before you buy crap you don't need on tv
4. to your car keys on weekend nights... if you approach them and you are drunk you'll have to catch them first if you want to drive. and the exercise may do some good to jumpstart your metabolism.
5. why cant we apply this to some random dog toy that fido can chase around.. it would have to be made out of that same stuff the unbreakable rulers are made of... but preferably stronger since those tend to break a whole lot.
6. and last but least, the practical jokers model, with adhesive, so you can stick whatever it is you need to put on it to annoy someone with.
thanks for orders operators are standing by at 555-5555 dont be alarmed if they cant pick up right away... there phones runa round the office whenever they ring!