Yes, I do buy the DVDs when they come out. A case in point was Star Wars: Episode III. I watched the movie in the cinema once. Then, not wanting to fork over another $30 to watch the same movie, I downloaded it. I bought the DVD on the first day after its release anyway.
Secondly, did you miss the part where I said that I have nothing against cinemas themselves? The cinema experience is awesome for some movies, and I would certainly not want all of them to disappear, but I resent the monopoly that they hold for the cinema-only phase of a movie's life. Do you consider that not everyone has access to a cinema? Or that, maybe, it's one that doesn't get the good movies until months after the big chains? How do you think the small cinemas feel about that?
Cinemas will have to compete on the basis of customer experience. No more ads before the start, and maybe the cinema will consider kicking out the small, screaming children and the jackasses using their phones. Maybe there will be good-tasting food, as opposed to the usual crap that cinemas serve. You, as a cinemagoer, should be happy about this, would you not agree.
Also, you refer to the theatrical release of a film as a "lifeline". The portion of profit made on selling DVDs is rising higher every day, and I don't hesitate to think it would grow further if all the people who only watch the movie once in the cinema instead bought it on DVD. Now that a high-quality experience is available to people in their own homes, via DVDs, big-screen TVs, projectors, what-have-you, it is foolish to give cinemas such a sweet deal.
In response to my last paragraph, I am almost certain that you will mention something about "not everyone has a home theatre". I count myself among them, but sitting back in my recliner, watching my pitiful 17" TV/Monitor, listening on two speakers only, is still better than the cinema experience I generally receive. Go figure.
Anyway, I hope that gives you some more things to think about.
I was under the impression that the MPAA was fairly aggressive when it came to DeCSS. Other such attempts at DRM will always be broken, because there will always be people willing to spend time trying to crack it. Furthermore, if the player is to be affordable, it has to have a chip slower than what a "modern" (whatever it might be at the time) computer would have. This means that there will always be a faster processor trying to crack the encryption than there will be in the device that is meant to play the media.
All the above being said, I still think there is a market niche for a company that does not use draconian copy protection on their products. I hope one of the big studios comes to recognize this, but I'm afraid they will not.
Why was my original post (GP) modded flamebait, just out of curiosity?
1) That I can watch them anywhere, copy them to any format, and do both of those things based on Open standards, without contrived devices intended to prevent such things.
2) That they are available in a buyable, watchable format at the same time they are released anywhere else (i.e. DVD and theatrical release occurs at the same time).
Until both of those conditions are met, I will continue to download movies for free. Number one is mostly available from the current DVD format, and for that I applaud it, but it also has a number of problems (DeCSS and the DMCA, for example), and I fear that the next generation (HD-DVD or Blu-ray) will take a step backward on this issue. As for number two, I am confident that the studios will figure it out eventually, and tell the big cinema chains to go fuck themselves. I am not against cinemas, but I am most certainly against the monopoly they hold for the first few months of a movie's life. I don't download movies because I'm cheap; I download them because there is no other way to watch them in the comfort of my home until the DVD is released. I'm sure there is a wide range of people like me in this regard, that would spend money on DVDs given the opportunity. How this develops.... we'll wait and see, I suppose, but whichever format offers the best combination of these two features will be my favorite.
That is an interesting read, but I think the article is mainly a bunch of bullshit. Although it's digusting that people view child pornography, or sexually abuse children, I think that the author of that article goes hugely overboard in telling parents to block wikipedia as a research resource for their children. I also think it is wrong to imply that wikipedia is pro-pedophile, just because some pedophiles have been known to edit an article about pedophilia. Try submitting it via the proper channels to discuss it next time, though.
There are some features of CSS that just don't work in IE, regardless of hacks or not (to my knowledge), therefore I would still need to use alternate methods to make everything look right. I have read repeatedly that position:fixed doesn't work in IE, and I can't think of a different way to do it (except maybe using javascript to physically change the location of the navbar. Could you give me any advice on that part specifically, regarding how to deal with it in IE?
You can control a car (mostly) with one hand. You can steer fine, if you are already on a highway or other street wherein there are no sharp corners. However, you must be able to use that second hand for turning onto a new street, or turning on your signal, or whatever else. This is the theory behind manual transmissions; you have to be able to steer with one hand, or you won't get too far (and however far you do get will have to be done in first gear). I'll make the occasional call while I'm driving, but never when I'm in a city, or there is a large amount of traffic around, or I'm going fast. Use some common sense, and everything will turn out alright.
It was a school project, so not really an ongoing problem. The problem with this system is that it still won't look proper in IE, and that was my target audience.
I do remember one or two occasions where minors couldn't get into a movie at all at Famous Players. No, I don't specifically remember which movies they were (one of them was fear dot com, I seem to recall), but they were definitely as restricted as possible. This introduces the possibility that there is an NC-17 rating in Canada, or some movies are evaluated on an individual basis for especially offensive content. YMMV.
It's not, but people don't go to the trouble to learn how to use a computer properly in many cases. You would never fault an automobile for being too difficult to operate, but it's just as complex as a computer in most ways (when it comes to the interface with the customer/user/driver). The difference is, we have laws in place to ensure that people know how to drive their cars. We just hand untrained people a complex machine which leaves them exposed to any number of bad things, and then we act like it's the manufacturer's fault for making it difficult to use.
It wouldn't be that hard if IE supported CSS properly. I made a beautiful site containing a complex CSS layout, but, of course, once I tested it in IE, I had to do it all again without CSS.
Perhaps it's because the French were so very annoying, and smelled so bad.
What'cha gonna say now?
Just kidding, guys, but you all have to admit that the French (and even the French Canadians) are not that easy to get along with. An interesting statistic would be to see how many wars they've started vs. how many wars they've fought.
Well, then I'm safe. Although the dice-rolling mechanic was basically the same, I added and removed enough other things that it's not exactly a copy. The game board was done from scratch, so that's not a problem either.
Ah, well now that I see from other comments that the speed limit on interstates is 55 mph, it all falls into place. I come from a place where a highway speed limit is almost always 100 km/h (62 mph) (on undivided, one-lane-each-way highways) and 110 km/h (68 mph) for big, wide, nice highways between cities. At that speed, 10-15 km/h above the speed limit is usually "with the flow of traffic" (so it's legal regardless of the speed limit, as it is in the interest of safety) and it's not uncommon for people to go 20 km/h above the speed limit.
In case you haven't noticed, RISK is hardly a new thing. I think Hasbro has had the past... I don't know, 50 years, to make money off this idea. I can see them being rightfully mad if someone distributed a similar board game and sold it in stores, but this situation is just excessive.
Hasbro should suck a fat cock... RISK is what, like 50 years old? Give it up already. I can see that you might be angry if a similar commercial product was to be released, but from what I can tell, this was a noncommerical venture. I made a RISK board of my own for a school project recently... are they gonna come and sue me? Copyright should definitely run out for RISK soon.
This is, in a way, akin to saying "I used Word, therefore I'm old". There are many versions, so it doesn't really help to date anything. I, too, vividly remember Turtle Graphics... that was a fun program.
What the hell are you talking about? I vividly remember playing Oregon Trail in elementary and junior high, and I'm 16! Perhaps you're showing something... your stupidity.
I'm firmly of the opinion that all people, especially teenagers, should be given all the rope needed to hang themselves. I have to work my ass off all day in school, and will have to for the rest of the year, because the school is worried that if a grade 11 has a spare, they might fail classes and not have enough credits to graduate grade 12. You know what I say to that? Fuck 'em! If they don't have enough credits, don't let them graduate. They have to learn at some point. Teach children to do whatever they do responsibly. Instead of saying "don't drink, don't do drugs, don't smoke, etc." say "do these things responsibly, and don't allow them to interfere with school and whatnot". People will never learn responsibility if they aren't given an opportunity. You can't make an omlette without breaking a few eggs, and you can't learn proper responsibility if you aren't given the chance to learn through your own fuckups now and again.
I'm suspicious that judgment suddenly just "comes to a person" after their 18th birthday, or after any other day for that reason. Assuming we eliminate the preteen age range from the discussion, it is impossible to tell at what age someone receives adequate judgment to do adult things. 18 is just a nice, arbitrary number that coincides with the average age of leaving high-school*, so at the very least, parents will still be able to control this sort of thing at their discretion. I am against age controls of any type on video games, movies, alcohol, tobacco, cigarettes, porno, etc. (as a 16 year old, mind you), because they just don't work and they make it harder for the responsible teens (such as myself) to make a mature decision to indulge in one or more of those things.
* Yes, I know it's 21 in the US. Sucks to be you, it's 18 up here in Alberta, Canada.
Could you clarify what you're saying? After reading your comment, I looked at some of my books, and all appear to have the copyright held by the authors, not the publishing house. Are you meaning to say that the publishing houses will only print the copyright notices in the book at such time as it is published, or that they actually hold the copyright itself?
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, I do buy the DVDs when they come out. A case in point was Star Wars: Episode III. I watched the movie in the cinema once. Then, not wanting to fork over another $30 to watch the same movie, I downloaded it. I bought the DVD on the first day after its release anyway.
Secondly, did you miss the part where I said that I have nothing against cinemas themselves? The cinema experience is awesome for some movies, and I would certainly not want all of them to disappear, but I resent the monopoly that they hold for the cinema-only phase of a movie's life. Do you consider that not everyone has access to a cinema? Or that, maybe, it's one that doesn't get the good movies until months after the big chains? How do you think the small cinemas feel about that?
Cinemas will have to compete on the basis of customer experience. No more ads before the start, and maybe the cinema will consider kicking out the small, screaming children and the jackasses using their phones. Maybe there will be good-tasting food, as opposed to the usual crap that cinemas serve. You, as a cinemagoer, should be happy about this, would you not agree.
Also, you refer to the theatrical release of a film as a "lifeline". The portion of profit made on selling DVDs is rising higher every day, and I don't hesitate to think it would grow further if all the people who only watch the movie once in the cinema instead bought it on DVD. Now that a high-quality experience is available to people in their own homes, via DVDs, big-screen TVs, projectors, what-have-you, it is foolish to give cinemas such a sweet deal.
In response to my last paragraph, I am almost certain that you will mention something about "not everyone has a home theatre". I count myself among them, but sitting back in my recliner, watching my pitiful 17" TV/Monitor, listening on two speakers only, is still better than the cinema experience I generally receive. Go figure.
Anyway, I hope that gives you some more things to think about.
I was under the impression that the MPAA was fairly aggressive when it came to DeCSS. Other such attempts at DRM will always be broken, because there will always be people willing to spend time trying to crack it. Furthermore, if the player is to be affordable, it has to have a chip slower than what a "modern" (whatever it might be at the time) computer would have. This means that there will always be a faster processor trying to crack the encryption than there will be in the device that is meant to play the media.
All the above being said, I still think there is a market niche for a company that does not use draconian copy protection on their products. I hope one of the big studios comes to recognize this, but I'm afraid they will not.
Why was my original post (GP) modded flamebait, just out of curiosity?
1) That I can watch them anywhere, copy them to any format, and do both of those things based on Open standards, without contrived devices intended to prevent such things.
2) That they are available in a buyable, watchable format at the same time they are released anywhere else (i.e. DVD and theatrical release occurs at the same time).
Until both of those conditions are met, I will continue to download movies for free. Number one is mostly available from the current DVD format, and for that I applaud it, but it also has a number of problems (DeCSS and the DMCA, for example), and I fear that the next generation (HD-DVD or Blu-ray) will take a step backward on this issue. As for number two, I am confident that the studios will figure it out eventually, and tell the big cinema chains to go fuck themselves. I am not against cinemas, but I am most certainly against the monopoly they hold for the first few months of a movie's life. I don't download movies because I'm cheap; I download them because there is no other way to watch them in the comfort of my home until the DVD is released. I'm sure there is a wide range of people like me in this regard, that would spend money on DVDs given the opportunity. How this develops.... we'll wait and see, I suppose, but whichever format offers the best combination of these two features will be my favorite.
That is an interesting read, but I think the article is mainly a bunch of bullshit. Although it's digusting that people view child pornography, or sexually abuse children, I think that the author of that article goes hugely overboard in telling parents to block wikipedia as a research resource for their children. I also think it is wrong to imply that wikipedia is pro-pedophile, just because some pedophiles have been known to edit an article about pedophilia. Try submitting it via the proper channels to discuss it next time, though.
There are some features of CSS that just don't work in IE, regardless of hacks or not (to my knowledge), therefore I would still need to use alternate methods to make everything look right. I have read repeatedly that position:fixed doesn't work in IE, and I can't think of a different way to do it (except maybe using javascript to physically change the location of the navbar. Could you give me any advice on that part specifically, regarding how to deal with it in IE?
You can control a car (mostly) with one hand. You can steer fine, if you are already on a highway or other street wherein there are no sharp corners. However, you must be able to use that second hand for turning onto a new street, or turning on your signal, or whatever else. This is the theory behind manual transmissions; you have to be able to steer with one hand, or you won't get too far (and however far you do get will have to be done in first gear). I'll make the occasional call while I'm driving, but never when I'm in a city, or there is a large amount of traffic around, or I'm going fast. Use some common sense, and everything will turn out alright.
It was a school project, so not really an ongoing problem. The problem with this system is that it still won't look proper in IE, and that was my target audience.
I do remember one or two occasions where minors couldn't get into a movie at all at Famous Players. No, I don't specifically remember which movies they were (one of them was fear dot com, I seem to recall), but they were definitely as restricted as possible. This introduces the possibility that there is an NC-17 rating in Canada, or some movies are evaluated on an individual basis for especially offensive content. YMMV.
Add exception: Cuban cigars... I haven't smoked one I didn't like.
Why do witches burn?
Because their made of wood?
That's right! Now, what else may you do with wood?
Build a bridge!
Yes, but could you not also build a bridge out of stone?
Hmm... good point.
Tell me: does wood sink in water?
No! It floats!
Tell me... what else floats, apart from wood?
A hamster?
Correct!
So, logically, if she weighs the same as a hamster... she's made of wood...? And therefore... a witch? A witch! Burn her, burn her!
It's not, but people don't go to the trouble to learn how to use a computer properly in many cases. You would never fault an automobile for being too difficult to operate, but it's just as complex as a computer in most ways (when it comes to the interface with the customer/user/driver). The difference is, we have laws in place to ensure that people know how to drive their cars. We just hand untrained people a complex machine which leaves them exposed to any number of bad things, and then we act like it's the manufacturer's fault for making it difficult to use.
It wouldn't be that hard if IE supported CSS properly. I made a beautiful site containing a complex CSS layout, but, of course, once I tested it in IE, I had to do it all again without CSS.
What'cha gonna say now?
Just kidding, guys, but you all have to admit that the French (and even the French Canadians) are not that easy to get along with. An interesting statistic would be to see how many wars they've started vs. how many wars they've fought.
Well, then I'm safe. Although the dice-rolling mechanic was basically the same, I added and removed enough other things that it's not exactly a copy. The game board was done from scratch, so that's not a problem either.
Why is this flamebait? I'm 16, and I should be able to make any bad decisions I want, and so should all the idiots my age. I know about what I speak.
Ah, well now that I see from other comments that the speed limit on interstates is 55 mph, it all falls into place. I come from a place where a highway speed limit is almost always 100 km/h (62 mph) (on undivided, one-lane-each-way highways) and 110 km/h (68 mph) for big, wide, nice highways between cities. At that speed, 10-15 km/h above the speed limit is usually "with the flow of traffic" (so it's legal regardless of the speed limit, as it is in the interest of safety) and it's not uncommon for people to go 20 km/h above the speed limit.
You meant to say 15 km/h, didn't you? 15 mph is quite a bit over the speed limit. That being said, I might go that fast every now and again... ;)
I would hope people try to drive wrecklessly. I believe the word you were looking for was recklessly.
In case you haven't noticed, RISK is hardly a new thing. I think Hasbro has had the past... I don't know, 50 years, to make money off this idea. I can see them being rightfully mad if someone distributed a similar board game and sold it in stores, but this situation is just excessive.
Hasbro should suck a fat cock... RISK is what, like 50 years old? Give it up already. I can see that you might be angry if a similar commercial product was to be released, but from what I can tell, this was a noncommerical venture. I made a RISK board of my own for a school project recently... are they gonna come and sue me? Copyright should definitely run out for RISK soon.
This is, in a way, akin to saying "I used Word, therefore I'm old". There are many versions, so it doesn't really help to date anything. I, too, vividly remember Turtle Graphics... that was a fun program.
What the hell are you talking about? I vividly remember playing Oregon Trail in elementary and junior high, and I'm 16! Perhaps you're showing something... your stupidity.
I'm firmly of the opinion that all people, especially teenagers, should be given all the rope needed to hang themselves. I have to work my ass off all day in school, and will have to for the rest of the year, because the school is worried that if a grade 11 has a spare, they might fail classes and not have enough credits to graduate grade 12. You know what I say to that? Fuck 'em! If they don't have enough credits, don't let them graduate. They have to learn at some point. Teach children to do whatever they do responsibly. Instead of saying "don't drink, don't do drugs, don't smoke, etc." say "do these things responsibly, and don't allow them to interfere with school and whatnot". People will never learn responsibility if they aren't given an opportunity. You can't make an omlette without breaking a few eggs, and you can't learn proper responsibility if you aren't given the chance to learn through your own fuckups now and again.
* Yes, I know it's 21 in the US. Sucks to be you, it's 18 up here in Alberta, Canada.
Could you clarify what you're saying? After reading your comment, I looked at some of my books, and all appear to have the copyright held by the authors, not the publishing house. Are you meaning to say that the publishing houses will only print the copyright notices in the book at such time as it is published, or that they actually hold the copyright itself?