Re:Less then 5 hours is "not too shabby"?
on
PSP Battery Journal
·
· Score: 1
Actually, Sony did learn, and apparently you didn't even bother to look this up. Not only is the PSP's battery exchangable, it hot-swappable, meaning you can actually switch with a game still going, just in sleep mode. Even Nintendo has learned, as their batteries can be swapped out too with a slight bit more effort.
Something to pay close attention to when talking about the Gamespot time... It's an estimate. We have no real idea what kind of testing they did to get that estimate at all.
I had about 8 passwords when I first entered college. I'd guess I'm way over that now, nevermind the obscure user names on top of these.
I mean, let's just see:
At Work:
general network, 1 email, 5 account passwords.
At Home:
1 email, about 3 one's for various online games, and 2 for instant messaging programs.
Online:
About 4 for various online vendors, 1 for a website I commonly goto, and probably another dozen I just got along the line for sites I rarely vist.
Out and about:
Can't forget that pin number
I'm not a school anymore, but when I was:
1 network
3 computer science account passwords
1 library
So, what's that, 20+? I'm not even a heavy online shopper so I could expect many other people to easily break 30+. And again, this doesn't consider that many sites demand some cryptic username too, and stupid security protocals that demand you change your password every other week.
Okay some speculation that could easily be a spoiler:
The combine do not appear to be from this dimension. In HL, they had broken through to another dimension called Xen, but this too does not appear to be the combine's home dimension. The combine appear to come from yet another dimension. In fact, it looks like the scientists have made a kind of truce with the occupants of Xen that were left behind on earth, and perhaps even those dimension itself. There is some talk of using Xen for the teleporter, and the combine not being able to do this, so that's what I draw my conclusions from.
It had a strong concept, a good start up, but got the potential got squandered in the final execution.
It's quite humorous and the tag system had potential as a fairly effective way of controlling things without having to worry about the nity-grity of "you there, minion, go here, confuse this investigator". Sadly, minions still act far too stupidly to the tags, like 5 valets going to confuse 1 guy, and even when they do confuse them, they often just leave them standing around in your base to just recover. Henchmen are nice, but their nasty nack of running into super agents and getting killed without you being any the wiser is really annoying. Lastly, the build system needed some little tweaks here and there to removed frustration (like, if I want to move an object, it should be removed from the collision detection with itself, rooms should be easily expandable or changed to a different type, outdoor structures should be demolishable).
I seriously agree on the disappointing world scheming interface. It's really dull to sit there watching a dark green circle turn slowly bright green to indicate your progress and not much else. Most often, even when you succeed, you get the same generic news clip that you got for pretty much all the other infamy acts in that region which although humorous the first time, quickly loses it's impact.
You racked up triple digit deaths on LttP?! Even on my first time through when I was like 9 I only sucked up double digits and most of those were simply because I couldn't be bothered to run to some place right near a respawn point. As I recall, my 3rd time thru I got 0 games played. Really, the only games that strike me as truly hard in the Nintendo gallary are typically the metroid titles. However, that said, I don't like my games being mindnumbingly hard by default. I much prefer those old fashion difficulty settings, particularly when they actually meant something, not "brutally hard, insanely hard, and impossible".
And have 5 lvls? DS doesn't exactly boost huge memory on it's carts either, and if it were to utilize it in a stream fashion the game would look nice a varied but be tiny.
I don't believe the idea behind patents is broken, I believe the implementation is broken.
Originally patents were intend for when Joe Blow came into the patent office, put his gizmo on the counter and said he wanted to patent it. Then, that became impractical, so they started allowing mere design of the gizmo to suffice. Then, that design become generalized to the point of simple theory rather than specific implementation. And now, it's started into the area of allowing patents on algorithms, namely Computer Programs, which however complex are still algorithms and procedures.
Another problem is the simple length of the patents. Like copyrights, patents have increased in duration since their original inception, while the afore mentioned broadening of patent scope was occurring. So, now we have excessively long durations on stuff that was never intended to be patented at all. This is again particularly evident in the area of software which operates in terms of years, not decades, and giving decades of exclusive access to a broadly stated algorithm is very stifling to development.
Lastly we have the issue of how patents are actually used. Once upon a time you were expected to actually put some effort into producing whatever it was you patented. Now, this was never enforced, but now that loophole is heavily exploited in this broadened patent system. Companies sit on patents for the sole purpose of sueing other companies. Others exclude people from making use of the very thing that is patented to stifle competition. Back to software again, it becomes difficult to use an invention to proceed to the next level because now instead of simply going to your local hardware store and buying those fancy new screws you need to put your machine together, to put your new program together you have to hunt through a mess of patents, hunt down the current patent holder, hope they are willing to license out their tech to you, and finally be able to pay whatever fee they may ask, all of which is a legal nightmare requiring you to hire yourself a well versed lawyer who probably also will cost you a pretty penny.
Last, as already mentioned, is the simple problem of inspecting these applications. The Patent office is so overburdened that they have essentially taken the position that pretty much anything will be given a patent, and the courts can figure it out later. However, that's no good. This badly tilts things in favor of large companies able to manage court and lawyer fees. As well, the moment a patent is given, however, frivolous, even the courts give it some respect, even if it is undeserved.
Again, I don't think the central idea of patents is bad, it has just been stretched and twisted WAY beyond it's functional limitations.
No, I didn't like B & W because the game sucked pure and simple.
You should really realize this on the 3rd level. No creature, and you just sit around casting a spell, again, and again, and some more, and some more... It was boring as all hell. Any game where you start reading a book for entertainment while playing it has an issue or two.
On top of this, and the bugs, the game had no real challenge to it in the end. It's an exercise in slow, painful attrition, nothing more.
Really, if it was marketed as some virtual pet simulator I might have given it some credit, but as a strategy game it sucked.
Okay, I followed it quite nicely when the name had the "theatre 3000" bit in there, and that could easily be a case for a trademark infringement. However, I got from the article that they removed that bit from the name. So, what are the suing based on then? You can't trademark a forumla, scientific or otherwise. Copyright it maybe, but even that I doubt.
Nevermind issues of that business model essentially being equivalent to shooting yourself in the foot, the single biggest reason that won't work is technical. Lag happens. Disconnections happen. Bugs happen. All of these could easily kill someone through absolutely no fault of theirs.
One thing you forgot to factor into your little thought is the tools the developers use to make these games are becoming increasingly powerful, and even more demanding. There are already tools in the major 3D software packages that would paralyze a current gen console yet they are very simple for a developer to access.
I doubt that has much to do with approval process, and much more to do with the popularity of the system. Making junk only works when you have a huge number of people to sell to.
Although I think that would be great to bring up in the case of a simple copy, the version here isn't a simply copy. One other thing that copyrights grant the creator is a type of moral control which basically says you have the right not to have your creative work used in ways you see as objectionable.
However, I believe that particular is non-transferable, at least I believe that is the case in Canada, not sure on the good old USA, so seeing as how the creator isn't around anymore it may not apply anyway.
Oh my, so much legal thinking. My brain is starting to hurt...
Nope, you can falsify evolution. Find an elephant fossil that existed before any known mammel and you've pretty much decimated evolution.
In fact, find any major out of pattern fossil and you could put a major hole in the theory, assuming it is real.
Another way would be to show with modern species that they simply cannot biologically change in the manner necessary for evolution to take place.
Evolution is a pretty simple theory in the end, basically just giving us that one species can transform over time into another via some naturally occurring process (not to be confused with the theory of natural selection which is just one proposed process).
I'm sorry, but that simply won't work. It completely destroys the capacity for a small company to take advantage of software because there is no longer a market for it.
I work in custom programming, and it isn't cheap for the customer, running quite easily into the 10k range per station, and frankly even at that price we're barely getting by. For your average consumer that is totally out of the park expense wise. For most small businesses that's a heck of a piece of change to fork out.
Eliminating the copyright on the software eliminates the mass market for software and totally destroys the ability for most consumers to afford it. It thus also carries with it the extreme decrease in the number of available products because companies can't expect to profit off mass market software anymore. Beyond that, there is only so much custom programming that can be done and can be afforded by the person or company desiring it and that can only sustain a small percentage software producers.
And the MPAA for that matter. The Government has found a truly uncopyable storage media and I'm certain both of these organizations will be overjoyed to put it to good use.
The difference between the Babylon 5 version of this storyline and the DS9 one is this:
In Babylon 5, the president was simply power hungry and nuts, knocking off his predecessor, and really controlled by outside forces, namely the shadows. He had no real sympathetic qualities at all, and was just plain made out as the "bad guy".
By contrast, in the DS9 episode, the admiral actually thought he was doing this for some good. The federation was indeed at real risk, and he felt stronger action needed to be taken to deal with this threat and used the events, plus some of his own making, to try and get his way.
So, where as B5 produced a cardboard villian, DS9 produced an antogonist you could actually understand and even sympathize with.
A lifestyle change for the better (let's make sure to stress the 'for the better' part) is indeed probably the single best and most effective way to get the job done. However, it is unfortunately also not 100% effective, nor 100% applicable. As you so aptly pointed out, a lot of people try, and try, and try, and end up on this eternal yo-yo that ends up making things worse, not better, for a variety of reasons. So, as nice as the ideal is, the simple fact of the matter is it isn't working as currently applied.
This concept can be held to any kind of patent. From engines to circuit boards to anything. So, your saying there should be no patents. No IP protections.
There is a big difference in the realm of hardware and software. If I patent a type of screw, I have the soul right to produce that screw, and license the production of that screw. Great.
Now, some inventor comes along and thinks: "hey, with this screw I can make this new type of motor." So, he goes and buys some screws that cost a few cents each and makes his few test motors to prove the concept. The motor works great, so he goes into production buying the individual screws from his local licensed produced of the screw. All is well.
In software it doesn't work so well though. I want to incorporate some new concept into my program so I can build it up to some grander concept. I don't buy an individual instance of this concept, I have to become the licensed producer, which is a whole lot more expensive, and a far greater hassle. As well, if the patent holder decides no, he doesn't want me to have a license, I'm probably hooped. At least in hardware you can often find substitutes, but when you have control of a whole concept, there is no substitute.
As many people have already pointed out, this does not protect them from litigation, and if that was their true goal, it is better to publish the IP rather than Patent.
Patenting has one purpose, to give you sole access to produce something. Unfortunately, patents were designed for hardware, and having a 20+ year monopoly on the production of a piece of hardware was reasonable. Having a 20+ year monopoly on an algorithm or protocal is just nuts and even if you don't sue one individual for infringement, there is enough threat of you doing so that anyone that comes even close to using it may feel threatened and therefore not produce a product.
Patents were never designed for software, and it is becoming more clear by the day that they are ill-suited to the task. They are stifling the very thing they are supposed to promote: innovation.
What we really need here is a new form of IP protection specific to software, or perhaps simply a modified version of Patent protect without the far reaching gasp of the currently model. Maybe Patents for software should only last a few short years, or perhaps they should be solidly rooted in an implementation rather than a protocal.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, Sony did learn, and apparently you didn't even bother to look this up. Not only is the PSP's battery exchangable, it hot-swappable, meaning you can actually switch with a game still going, just in sleep mode. Even Nintendo has learned, as their batteries can be swapped out too with a slight bit more effort.
Something to pay close attention to when talking about the Gamespot time... It's an estimate. We have no real idea what kind of testing they did to get that estimate at all.
I mean, let's just see:
At Work:
general network, 1 email, 5 account passwords.
At Home:
1 email, about 3 one's for various online games, and 2 for instant messaging programs.
Online:
About 4 for various online vendors, 1 for a website I commonly goto, and probably another dozen I just got along the line for sites I rarely vist.
Out and about:
Can't forget that pin number
I'm not a school anymore, but when I was:
1 network
3 computer science account passwords
1 library
So, what's that, 20+? I'm not even a heavy online shopper so I could expect many other people to easily break 30+. And again, this doesn't consider that many sites demand some cryptic username too, and stupid security protocals that demand you change your password every other week.
Blu-ray apparently can do upto 4 layers, so 200 GB.
The combine do not appear to be from this dimension. In HL, they had broken through to another dimension called Xen, but this too does not appear to be the combine's home dimension. The combine appear to come from yet another dimension. In fact, it looks like the scientists have made a kind of truce with the occupants of Xen that were left behind on earth, and perhaps even those dimension itself. There is some talk of using Xen for the teleporter, and the combine not being able to do this, so that's what I draw my conclusions from.
It's quite humorous and the tag system had potential as a fairly effective way of controlling things without having to worry about the nity-grity of "you there, minion, go here, confuse this investigator". Sadly, minions still act far too stupidly to the tags, like 5 valets going to confuse 1 guy, and even when they do confuse them, they often just leave them standing around in your base to just recover. Henchmen are nice, but their nasty nack of running into super agents and getting killed without you being any the wiser is really annoying. Lastly, the build system needed some little tweaks here and there to removed frustration (like, if I want to move an object, it should be removed from the collision detection with itself, rooms should be easily expandable or changed to a different type, outdoor structures should be demolishable).
I seriously agree on the disappointing world scheming interface. It's really dull to sit there watching a dark green circle turn slowly bright green to indicate your progress and not much else. Most often, even when you succeed, you get the same generic news clip that you got for pretty much all the other infamy acts in that region which although humorous the first time, quickly loses it's impact.
Overall, not a game I'd recommend buying.
You racked up triple digit deaths on LttP?! Even on my first time through when I was like 9 I only sucked up double digits and most of those were simply because I couldn't be bothered to run to some place right near a respawn point. As I recall, my 3rd time thru I got 0 games played. Really, the only games that strike me as truly hard in the Nintendo gallary are typically the metroid titles. However, that said, I don't like my games being mindnumbingly hard by default. I much prefer those old fashion difficulty settings, particularly when they actually meant something, not "brutally hard, insanely hard, and impossible".
And have 5 lvls? DS doesn't exactly boost huge memory on it's carts either, and if it were to utilize it in a stream fashion the game would look nice a varied but be tiny.
Originally patents were intend for when Joe Blow came into the patent office, put his gizmo on the counter and said he wanted to patent it. Then, that became impractical, so they started allowing mere design of the gizmo to suffice. Then, that design become generalized to the point of simple theory rather than specific implementation. And now, it's started into the area of allowing patents on algorithms, namely Computer Programs, which however complex are still algorithms and procedures.
Another problem is the simple length of the patents. Like copyrights, patents have increased in duration since their original inception, while the afore mentioned broadening of patent scope was occurring. So, now we have excessively long durations on stuff that was never intended to be patented at all. This is again particularly evident in the area of software which operates in terms of years, not decades, and giving decades of exclusive access to a broadly stated algorithm is very stifling to development.
Lastly we have the issue of how patents are actually used. Once upon a time you were expected to actually put some effort into producing whatever it was you patented. Now, this was never enforced, but now that loophole is heavily exploited in this broadened patent system. Companies sit on patents for the sole purpose of sueing other companies. Others exclude people from making use of the very thing that is patented to stifle competition. Back to software again, it becomes difficult to use an invention to proceed to the next level because now instead of simply going to your local hardware store and buying those fancy new screws you need to put your machine together, to put your new program together you have to hunt through a mess of patents, hunt down the current patent holder, hope they are willing to license out their tech to you, and finally be able to pay whatever fee they may ask, all of which is a legal nightmare requiring you to hire yourself a well versed lawyer who probably also will cost you a pretty penny.
Last, as already mentioned, is the simple problem of inspecting these applications. The Patent office is so overburdened that they have essentially taken the position that pretty much anything will be given a patent, and the courts can figure it out later. However, that's no good. This badly tilts things in favor of large companies able to manage court and lawyer fees. As well, the moment a patent is given, however, frivolous, even the courts give it some respect, even if it is undeserved.
Again, I don't think the central idea of patents is bad, it has just been stretched and twisted WAY beyond it's functional limitations.
You should really realize this on the 3rd level. No creature, and you just sit around casting a spell, again, and again, and some more, and some more... It was boring as all hell. Any game where you start reading a book for entertainment while playing it has an issue or two.
On top of this, and the bugs, the game had no real challenge to it in the end. It's an exercise in slow, painful attrition, nothing more.
Really, if it was marketed as some virtual pet simulator I might have given it some credit, but as a strategy game it sucked.
Okay, I followed it quite nicely when the name had the "theatre 3000" bit in there, and that could easily be a case for a trademark infringement. However, I got from the article that they removed that bit from the name. So, what are the suing based on then? You can't trademark a forumla, scientific or otherwise. Copyright it maybe, but even that I doubt.
Nevermind issues of that business model essentially being equivalent to shooting yourself in the foot, the single biggest reason that won't work is technical. Lag happens. Disconnections happen. Bugs happen. All of these could easily kill someone through absolutely no fault of theirs.
One thing you forgot to factor into your little thought is the tools the developers use to make these games are becoming increasingly powerful, and even more demanding. There are already tools in the major 3D software packages that would paralyze a current gen console yet they are very simple for a developer to access.
I doubt that has much to do with approval process, and much more to do with the popularity of the system. Making junk only works when you have a huge number of people to sell to.
However, I believe that particular is non-transferable, at least I believe that is the case in Canada, not sure on the good old USA, so seeing as how the creator isn't around anymore it may not apply anyway.
Oh my, so much legal thinking. My brain is starting to hurt...
Another way would be to show with modern species that they simply cannot biologically change in the manner necessary for evolution to take place.
Evolution is a pretty simple theory in the end, basically just giving us that one species can transform over time into another via some naturally occurring process (not to be confused with the theory of natural selection which is just one proposed process).
I work in custom programming, and it isn't cheap for the customer, running quite easily into the 10k range per station, and frankly even at that price we're barely getting by. For your average consumer that is totally out of the park expense wise. For most small businesses that's a heck of a piece of change to fork out.
Eliminating the copyright on the software eliminates the mass market for software and totally destroys the ability for most consumers to afford it. It thus also carries with it the extreme decrease in the number of available products because companies can't expect to profit off mass market software anymore. Beyond that, there is only so much custom programming that can be done and can be afforded by the person or company desiring it and that can only sustain a small percentage software producers.
And the MPAA for that matter. The Government has found a truly uncopyable storage media and I'm certain both of these organizations will be overjoyed to put it to good use.
In Babylon 5, the president was simply power hungry and nuts, knocking off his predecessor, and really controlled by outside forces, namely the shadows. He had no real sympathetic qualities at all, and was just plain made out as the "bad guy".
By contrast, in the DS9 episode, the admiral actually thought he was doing this for some good. The federation was indeed at real risk, and he felt stronger action needed to be taken to deal with this threat and used the events, plus some of his own making, to try and get his way.
So, where as B5 produced a cardboard villian, DS9 produced an antogonist you could actually understand and even sympathize with.
A lifestyle change for the better (let's make sure to stress the 'for the better' part) is indeed probably the single best and most effective way to get the job done. However, it is unfortunately also not 100% effective, nor 100% applicable. As you so aptly pointed out, a lot of people try, and try, and try, and end up on this eternal yo-yo that ends up making things worse, not better, for a variety of reasons. So, as nice as the ideal is, the simple fact of the matter is it isn't working as currently applied.
There is a big difference in the realm of hardware and software. If I patent a type of screw, I have the soul right to produce that screw, and license the production of that screw. Great.
Now, some inventor comes along and thinks: "hey, with this screw I can make this new type of motor." So, he goes and buys some screws that cost a few cents each and makes his few test motors to prove the concept. The motor works great, so he goes into production buying the individual screws from his local licensed produced of the screw. All is well.
In software it doesn't work so well though. I want to incorporate some new concept into my program so I can build it up to some grander concept. I don't buy an individual instance of this concept, I have to become the licensed producer, which is a whole lot more expensive, and a far greater hassle. As well, if the patent holder decides no, he doesn't want me to have a license, I'm probably hooped. At least in hardware you can often find substitutes, but when you have control of a whole concept, there is no substitute.
As many people have already pointed out, this does not protect them from litigation, and if that was their true goal, it is better to publish the IP rather than Patent.
Patenting has one purpose, to give you sole access to produce something. Unfortunately, patents were designed for hardware, and having a 20+ year monopoly on the production of a piece of hardware was reasonable. Having a 20+ year monopoly on an algorithm or protocal is just nuts and even if you don't sue one individual for infringement, there is enough threat of you doing so that anyone that comes even close to using it may feel threatened and therefore not produce a product.
Patents were never designed for software, and it is becoming more clear by the day that they are ill-suited to the task. They are stifling the very thing they are supposed to promote: innovation.
What we really need here is a new form of IP protection specific to software, or perhaps simply a modified version of Patent protect without the far reaching gasp of the currently model. Maybe Patents for software should only last a few short years, or perhaps they should be solidly rooted in an implementation rather than a protocal.
Ugh! So, out of curiousity, are you going to be in any way billed for that advertisement?
Yes, but there are a lot of immature and chickenhawkish people in the world. Still, that in itself doesn't mean they are wrong or right.