Really? I know people who bought Sony Playstations to use as a DVD player. And PS3s as a blu-ray player. And XBOXs to stream Tivo. Who decide between buying a game for their PC, or for their console. So that day came and went about 5 years ago. Some people even browse the web or do social networking on their consoles.
.hard core gamers are hardcore gamers. they will always want a platform that is specific to gaming and gaming alone.
The people I just described are the new generation of hardcore gamers. 20-somethings who buy the latest game that just came out. The ones who spend hours a day getting their Halo rankings higher.
They don't care if the platform is specific to gaming or not, so long as gaming isn't compromised in some way. The iPhone isn't a gaming device because it has no controller. But that doesn't mean that a device with a controller could not also have a phone in it. Or be a PDA. The current DS is exactly that, but only thanks to the homebrew community.
look at the figures before you judge the data.
I have looked at all the figures which you have shown me. Why do people post things like that without even providing a link?
I hope I don't get flamed for nitpicking, but cell phones don't have a monthly fee. Cell phone service does. If Nintendo added cell phone capability, that doesn't mean that every 7-year-old has to activate it.
What happens when, in the future, a cell phone is a 50 cent piece of hardware that can be embedded into a wristwatch? Will people not buy that wristwatch just because it has a cell phone in it?
I don't like carrying multiple devices. So I hacked my DS and made it a PDA, browser, etc. But then I had to carry a phone. And much like many people, I said the heck with carrying around the DS/PDA since my phone did all that and more.
I agree that convergence could result in some overlap in purpose. But I don't think anyone will refuse to buy a device just because it includes a feature they won't use. And I suspect that in the future you won't have a choice. Either that: or we will carry around a dumb LCD display, and we will buy tiny little modules for it like a cell phone and a gaming system. That's gives you the best of both worlds - convergence, without carrying around redundant devices or paying for what you don't need.
I grieve with you, as I was one of the last to get a smart phone. But I think society will change to accept it. Those arbitrary rules about not bringing a cell phone into this place or that place will go away when cell phones can be embedded into a watch or a piece of jewelry, or when everything has a cell phone in it.
You are right that we need to deal with privacy issues though.
I am part of that homebrew community. I get it. But you must understand the level of effort that goes into it, and the reward.
Hacking the DS was special because the hardware was great, and cheap: you could do 10 times as much with it as Nintendo was actually doing. That makes it really cool. But the DS is no longer unique. What takes considerable effort and reverse-engineering on the DS, can now be done trivially with modern devices.
You are right that somebody will hack it - probably just to be able to copy games, but it won't be the same since those developers can spend less effort for greater effect on another platform.
And if Nintendo opens the platform, the entire point becomes moot.
I didn't say that, or anything like it. You put words in my mouth then argued against them. It would be silly of me to say that since I am 33 and I own a Nintendo DS and I write software for it. I have one because my immediate circle of friends own them.
What I said is that the next generation of devices won't appeal to the older crowd unless they have PDA capabilities.
I used to know a dozen 30-somethings with DSs -- every one had a mod chip. That was about 3 years ago. Now, at least half of those same people have iPhones, and don't touch their DSs. I'm predicting that this trend will continue.
I am still waiting for the day when operating systems will become interchangeable commodities. Or at least, when software development does not depend on the OS.
Debian now supports running with multiple kernels. Apple's POSIX compatibility layer runs on their customized Mach kernel. Most packages run on BSD and Linux. I can write software using Java,.NET, or C++ (Qt, Boost, APR,...) and it will run on almost anything. So why do we care about operating systems any longer? Why is this the #1 thing when buying a piece of computer hardware? Should we not be at the point where any half-competent developer can just code to one of the many many cross-platform "platforms" and be OS-independent?
Yes, there are certainly features that are OS specific. But usually, those are hardware-specific. I can't expect every app that runs on my XBOX 360 to run on an iPhone. But I should expect that basic common tools can run on any netbook, regardless of OS. Or that a simple PDA application will run on any cell phone with a keyboard and touch screen.
If the world was filled with the kind of programmers who hang around on Slashdot, then this would have happened 10 years ago. I am sometimes amazed that it is still happening today.
Portable game systems are now competing with cell phones. Nintendo needs to realize that for their next portable game system or it will be limited to elementary and middle school kids. Beyond that age, they want a PDA / cell phone.
Granted, there are some big limitations to a cell phone as a gaming platform. The DS and DSi are much cheaper than the iPhone or even the iPod touch, and they have better control inputs. But that may change with future phones, especially Android phones.
The next DS also needs to be open to developers. That is a huge market that Nintendo missed. I know kids who have hacked DS's because they not only get games, but they get a scheduler, dictionary, and Wikipedia. Had Nintendo sold basic PDA functionality then the DS would have widened it's market. It is amazing how big the homebrew community is. I doubt that the homebrew community will spend the effort to reverse-engineer the next Nintendo hand-held when they could buy a cheap, open cell phone for the same price.
We are really seeing hand-held device convergence. I know people who don't carry a watch any longer because they have a cell phone. Nintendo needs to widen their thinking.
These are intended to provide a continuous, moderate amount of power for a very long time. Gasoline provides a variable, large amount of power for a very short time.
The last thing you want is to have another country writing your ethics rules. This sounds like something the people of Italy need to deal with directly.
Ever since multiplayer PC gaming, I have been surprised that I have not heard about phishing mods or virus mods. When you connect to a modded server, most multiplayer PC games will automatically download and execute scripts that run within the game engine. It shocks me that nobody has found a way to break out of the game engine sandbox and compromise a machine.
Now, consoles don't (AFAIK) support downloading mods. But I imagine that there would be similar attacks based on sending garbage data to the server as a way to compromise it. From there, you should be able to access a lot of information or launch more serious attacks.
Is this a stepping stone to Debian moving from Linux to BSD permanently? I'm trying to figure out if the FreeBSD licenses are more compatible with the Debian philosphy, or less.
Was there something in the OEM licenses that prevented PC vendors from installing 3rd-party browsers? The "settlement" spends a lot of time talking about the ballot screen for selecting browsers. But I'm not sure why another vendor could not have made their own ballot screen if they wanted. Or just install whatever browser they like.
Because almost every other type of unintentional sharing of files (if not all) are already covered by electronic privacy laws.
Incorrect. The correct answer is "Because legislators are morons and follow zeitgeist instead of reason."
There are 2 ways to share files: P2P, and client-server. Those are technical terms. If this legislation says that it only applies to P2P, then it just flat-out won't work. Common examples: Backup software or remove diagnostics software.
I worked at an office where we used Baggy pantsing to achieve this same effect. It worked brilliantly until on particular manager tried to make it seem like we were causing the problem, not pointing it out. I don't think that person lasted too long though.
I have a better solution - the ACLU and the EFF fight this to the Supreme Court, who then decides that granting immunity is a power reserved to the president, and that it violates the constitutional rule forbidding ex-post-facto laws. The court thus strikes down the law, and now the original case proceeds. Meanwhile, Obama sweats and has to decide if he is going to grant individuals immunity using his authority as president. By doing so he can no longer hide under the guise that the FISA update bill was a bad law with a few good compromises and he had to vote for it. And he loses significant political capital if he does.
In what way does the administration have the same stance as the summary?
The summary says:
Democratic lawmakers to roll back some provisions of the Patriot Act... revoking that immunity legislation...limiting the government's power to issue "national security letters," and limiting "black bag" searches...
The original AC says:
Obama is opposed to watering down the Patriot act.
The article I linked to says:
The Obama administration has told Congress it supports renewing three provisions of the Patriot Act due to expire at year's end.
supports renewing != limiting, rolling back. The only thing that indicates any similarity in thinking is this part:
might consider "modifications" to the act
might consider modifications != limiting, rolling back
Slashdot Mirror
.still waiting for that to come to fruition.
Really? I know people who bought Sony Playstations to use as a DVD player. And PS3s as a blu-ray player. And XBOXs to stream Tivo. Who decide between buying a game for their PC, or for their console. So that day came and went about 5 years ago. Some people even browse the web or do social networking on their consoles.
.hard core gamers are hardcore gamers. they will always want a platform that is specific to gaming and gaming alone.
The people I just described are the new generation of hardcore gamers. 20-somethings who buy the latest game that just came out. The ones who spend hours a day getting their Halo rankings higher.
They don't care if the platform is specific to gaming or not, so long as gaming isn't compromised in some way. The iPhone isn't a gaming device because it has no controller. But that doesn't mean that a device with a controller could not also have a phone in it. Or be a PDA. The current DS is exactly that, but only thanks to the homebrew community.
look at the figures before you judge the data.
I have looked at all the figures which you have shown me. Why do people post things like that without even providing a link?
I hope I don't get flamed for nitpicking, but cell phones don't have a monthly fee. Cell phone service does. If Nintendo added cell phone capability, that doesn't mean that every 7-year-old has to activate it.
What happens when, in the future, a cell phone is a 50 cent piece of hardware that can be embedded into a wristwatch? Will people not buy that wristwatch just because it has a cell phone in it?
I don't like carrying multiple devices. So I hacked my DS and made it a PDA, browser, etc. But then I had to carry a phone. And much like many people, I said the heck with carrying around the DS/PDA since my phone did all that and more.
I agree that convergence could result in some overlap in purpose. But I don't think anyone will refuse to buy a device just because it includes a feature they won't use. And I suspect that in the future you won't have a choice. Either that: or we will carry around a dumb LCD display, and we will buy tiny little modules for it like a cell phone and a gaming system. That's gives you the best of both worlds - convergence, without carrying around redundant devices or paying for what you don't need.
The most insightful reply yet is from an AC. :-)
I grieve with you, as I was one of the last to get a smart phone. But I think society will change to accept it. Those arbitrary rules about not bringing a cell phone into this place or that place will go away when cell phones can be embedded into a watch or a piece of jewelry, or when everything has a cell phone in it.
You are right that we need to deal with privacy issues though.
I am part of that homebrew community. I get it. But you must understand the level of effort that goes into it, and the reward.
Hacking the DS was special because the hardware was great, and cheap: you could do 10 times as much with it as Nintendo was actually doing. That makes it really cool. But the DS is no longer unique. What takes considerable effort and reverse-engineering on the DS, can now be done trivially with modern devices.
You are right that somebody will hack it - probably just to be able to copy games, but it won't be the same since those developers can spend less effort for greater effect on another platform.
And if Nintendo opens the platform, the entire point becomes moot.
I didn't say that, or anything like it. You put words in my mouth then argued against them. It would be silly of me to say that since I am 33 and I own a Nintendo DS and I write software for it. I have one because my immediate circle of friends own them.
What I said is that the next generation of devices won't appeal to the older crowd unless they have PDA capabilities.
I used to know a dozen 30-somethings with DSs -- every one had a mod chip. That was about 3 years ago. Now, at least half of those same people have iPhones, and don't touch their DSs. I'm predicting that this trend will continue.
I am still waiting for the day when operating systems will become interchangeable commodities. Or at least, when software development does not depend on the OS.
Debian now supports running with multiple kernels. Apple's POSIX compatibility layer runs on their customized Mach kernel. Most packages run on BSD and Linux. I can write software using Java, .NET, or C++ (Qt, Boost, APR, ...) and it will run on almost anything. So why do we care about operating systems any longer? Why is this the #1 thing when buying a piece of computer hardware? Should we not be at the point where any half-competent developer can just code to one of the many many cross-platform "platforms" and be OS-independent?
Yes, there are certainly features that are OS specific. But usually, those are hardware-specific. I can't expect every app that runs on my XBOX 360 to run on an iPhone. But I should expect that basic common tools can run on any netbook, regardless of OS. Or that a simple PDA application will run on any cell phone with a keyboard and touch screen.
If the world was filled with the kind of programmers who hang around on Slashdot, then this would have happened 10 years ago. I am sometimes amazed that it is still happening today.
Portable game systems are now competing with cell phones. Nintendo needs to realize that for their next portable game system or it will be limited to elementary and middle school kids. Beyond that age, they want a PDA / cell phone.
Granted, there are some big limitations to a cell phone as a gaming platform. The DS and DSi are much cheaper than the iPhone or even the iPod touch, and they have better control inputs. But that may change with future phones, especially Android phones.
The next DS also needs to be open to developers. That is a huge market that Nintendo missed. I know kids who have hacked DS's because they not only get games, but they get a scheduler, dictionary, and Wikipedia. Had Nintendo sold basic PDA functionality then the DS would have widened it's market. It is amazing how big the homebrew community is. I doubt that the homebrew community will spend the effort to reverse-engineer the next Nintendo hand-held when they could buy a cheap, open cell phone for the same price.
We are really seeing hand-held device convergence. I know people who don't carry a watch any longer because they have a cell phone. Nintendo needs to widen their thinking.
In Massachusetts, truth is not the ultimate defense against libel."
Spewed milk. Onto my desk. At work.
(Seriously: I was eating chili so I had milk to kill the burn)
1) They don't scale.
2) They are too expensive.
These are intended to provide a continuous, moderate amount of power for a very long time. Gasoline provides a variable, large amount of power for a very short time.
The last thing you want is to have another country writing your ethics rules. This sounds like something the people of Italy need to deal with directly.
Ever since multiplayer PC gaming, I have been surprised that I have not heard about phishing mods or virus mods. When you connect to a modded server, most multiplayer PC games will automatically download and execute scripts that run within the game engine. It shocks me that nobody has found a way to break out of the game engine sandbox and compromise a machine.
Now, consoles don't (AFAIK) support downloading mods. But I imagine that there would be similar attacks based on sending garbage data to the server as a way to compromise it. From there, you should be able to access a lot of information or launch more serious attacks.
Does anyone know of this happening?
Is this a stepping stone to Debian moving from Linux to BSD permanently? I'm trying to figure out if the FreeBSD licenses are more compatible with the Debian philosphy, or less.
I wonder how many of those violent crimes were committed by drug addicts.
Was there something in the OEM licenses that prevented PC vendors from installing 3rd-party browsers? The "settlement" spends a lot of time talking about the ballot screen for selecting browsers. But I'm not sure why another vendor could not have made their own ballot screen if they wanted. Or just install whatever browser they like.
Because almost every other type of unintentional sharing of files (if not all) are already covered by electronic privacy laws.
Incorrect. The correct answer is "Because legislators are morons and follow zeitgeist instead of reason."
There are 2 ways to share files: P2P, and client-server. Those are technical terms. If this legislation says that it only applies to P2P, then it just flat-out won't work. Common examples: Backup software or remove diagnostics software.
I keep a list of who proposes good laws and bad laws. This one was introduced by Senator Richard J Durbin. I'm adding him to my good list.
Durbin for president?
It doesn't matter what ebay's terms of service say. They can't violate the law. The DMCA requires them to restore the auction.
Why is this not covered by wiretap laws and recording laws? The GPS device is recording information about you and sending it to someone else.
Facts and figures cannot be copyrighted. And how can public information be abused? They just want money.
I worked at an office where we used Baggy pantsing to achieve this same effect. It worked brilliantly until on particular manager tried to make it seem like we were causing the problem, not pointing it out. I don't think that person lasted too long though.
I have a better solution - the ACLU and the EFF fight this to the Supreme Court, who then decides that granting immunity is a power reserved to the president, and that it violates the constitutional rule forbidding ex-post-facto laws. The court thus strikes down the law, and now the original case proceeds. Meanwhile, Obama sweats and has to decide if he is going to grant individuals immunity using his authority as president. By doing so he can no longer hide under the guise that the FISA update bill was a bad law with a few good compromises and he had to vote for it. And he loses significant political capital if he does.
In what way does the administration have the same stance as the summary?
The summary says:
Democratic lawmakers to roll back some provisions of the Patriot Act... revoking that immunity legislation... limiting the government's power to issue "national security letters," and limiting "black bag" searches...
The original AC says:
Obama is opposed to watering down the Patriot act.
The article I linked to says:
The Obama administration has told Congress it supports renewing three provisions of the Patriot Act due to expire at year's end.
supports renewing != limiting, rolling back. The only thing that indicates any similarity in thinking is this part:
might consider "modifications" to the act
might consider modifications != limiting, rolling back
1) Laptops.
2) Buggy suspend-to-disk implementations.